See strupgolf and Noah930 comments.

Do a search on the internet why these car companies are in trouble. Benefits to union workers and retirees.

Health benefits and pensions for UAW retirees who assembled the trucks we bought in the '80s?

I didn't buy a Ford truck until the 90's.

THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH CUSTOMERS FOR THE AMERICAN MANUFACTURER'S CARS.

(repeat ad nauseam).

The fact is that the US govt. could give them 10 trillion dollars, and these companies would still eventually go out of business and need more money.

They are:

a) poorly run
b) make poorly designed products that do not keep up with current trends in technology or consumer demand
c) there are not enough customers for the cars that these companies make.


The bailout will not work.

That is probably truce. Why isn't any of the banks willing to loan the monies to these companies. They analyzed the risks and for the gains it not worth it.

And tons of 'American' cars are made in Mexico and Canada. The union is not the biggest problem with Detroit.

So what is?

Not trying to troll. Just honestly wonder what you think is the biggest obstacle Detroit has to being profitable/viable.

Personally, I think the Unions represent one of the biggest cancers on our auto industry (and entire national economy, indirectly). But I'd have to say that corporate mismanagement is another abomination that's killing our auto industry. And I'd have to offer that due to previously horrendously crappy Detroit-badged products, the very poor image that American consumers have of American automotive products rounds out the trifecta that's sending the Big 3 to the brink of insolvency.

To fix the current situation, you have to fix all three problems. Otherwise, IMO we're doomed to repeat what's going on now.

The fastest way to do it is to let the auto manufacturers go bankrupt. Then a judge can toss the contracts and allow for restructuring.

Ford just re-hired 1000 workers for the new F-150 assembly line - that must mean something!

Gas is under $2.00 a gallon.

Why so few people realize this, I have no idea. Everyone thinks that bankruptcy means close your doors, which is not the case. Yes, people would lose their jobs. But ultimately the company that emerged would be more lean and efficient than before. BK is the only way these companies will sufficiently clean house to survive.

How much in state FDI & tax incentives did they receive for opening a plant in the US?

Hmmm...

Alabama 2002 - Hyundai $252.8 million
Alabama 1993 - Mercedes $252 Million
Alabama 1999 - Honda $102 Million

Missisppi 2000 - Nissan $295 million

South Carolina 1992 - BMW $155 million

Tennessee 2008 VW - $577 Million plus $300 millions in future franchise tax breaks over the next 30 years, $5,000 credit per employee for the next 20 years

Not as much as the US auto bailout plan...

What the hell is wrong with state tax breaks? You think new Big 3 plants don't get the same treatment? It's called economic development. States do so because the upside is greater than the tax breaks that they give, and it benefits their state.

That is absolutely totally different than handing a company billions in cash.

There is only about 20 hours of assembly labor on 'the line'. Suppose they work for free. You cut maybe $1,300 off the vehicles price?

Aside form guesses and assumptions, can someone post the benefit cost per vehicle?

Because the BIG Three are telling congress that more jobs will be lost and with current unemployment level at 6+%, Congress doesn't want the unemployment level to hit 10% as some forecasters are saying it will if the BIG Three goes into bankruptcy.

I really do not understand how blaming the workers and union is justifiable, when comparing an import company that has only been building on US soil for several years. The big three have been paying wages and pensions for a very long time. Maybe when Honda, Toyota or any of the other new companies actually start getting as many pensioned workers to care about we will see how they handle it.They pay pretty much the same as the big three and give the same benefits so why is no one complaining about labor costs for them. Yes the unions do suck up some extra money but on the scale of things do you really think it is worth thousands per vehicle

If GM or Chrysler file Chap 11 BK now, they will not re-emerge. They will be liquidated and 1MM to 3MM jobs lost. Because there is no private entity willing/able to provide sufficient debtor-in-possession credit ($20-30BN?) to finance the restructuring. To successfully file and emerge from Chap 11, they will need govt support. This is the "pre-packaged BK" option that some advocate (I do). I think there is a good chance that will eventually happen. Or, something that essentially works like a Chapter 11 BK but just isn't called that. But right now, at the transition between Administrations and with very little time, looks like the best that Congress can do is a stop-gap to get the companies into 2009 when this will be dealt with. If indeed they can do that - the Senate Republicans seem solidly opposed.

The only pension plan at those companies are 401K plans, not company sponsored plans like the Big Three.

Thank you for saying that.

Bad assumption. Twenty hours of assembly time to build a vehicles, but how many people are involved in building the vehicle? If one person can build the vehicle in 20 hours than you can save 1300 per vehicles but it more like 100 to 200 persons per vehicles charging time to the assembly.