Why Keep GM, Chrysler Alive?

Maybe the executives should be asking what is Ford doing and why is it working?

I do remember when Obama was talking about bailing out all three automakers, all three came to Washington with their hat held out in their hands.

Once the the terms were announced Ford grabbed the fastest car they had and left! Chrysler and GM began licking the boots that were soon to be on BP's neck.

I am not sure why bankruptcy wasn't the first choice for GM and Chrysler.

I do know that Obama gave the auto unions a significant share of GM stock and then installed a puppet CEO. From that point the results have been as lackluster as the US economy. Fire those who are running it into the ground? Okay, but where does the buck really stop?

I am not sure why bankruptcy wasn't the first choice for GM and Chrysler.

I believe the automakers actually wanted it. Because bankruptcy would have released them of union contracts. The union didn't want that, and the government followed.

The bucks stops nowhere because the choice is no ones at fault, or everyone involved is at fault. There is no courage.

The Real Question is: (1) "How Much Control Should the Government Have?" (2) How Much Control over Government, should the people have? (3) Should the MAJORITY Rule? (4) Should the Meanest rule? [ 1 to 10 ~ 1= Least ]

Hi A Hero,

The real danger came from Japan, South Korea later. GM and Chrysler inability to understand and react to the changes in the marketplace was the biggest error. Today, the danger is much bigger, the Chineses and Indians are coming. You think that money will help? You think new CEO will help? Not at all! They come from the same school and educated the same way to repreduce the same results. The real difficulties we have is about oil supply and its consequences. We have to get up and recognize that the world is changed. When the Berlin Wall was teared down, separations and frontiers are disappeared, everything became global.

All CEOs came in private airplanes to get the American workers money. It was an error! This is my opinion, Gil.

Let them die! We will buy cars the next day from the remaining companies, Gil.

they should do to these companies like they did to ma bell. Instead of having one large company, have 10 smaller compnies.

Like AT&T - That worked out real well!

Everyone's bill went up for less service!

One of the government's stupid moves.

that is true, my point is break it up. And let the unprofitable enities die off. Instead of dumping cash to a inefficient bloated large corporation just because we can't afford to let them go out of business and add to the unemployment.

that way it takes away the barginning chip from big corp. And the enities that did die off, can be absorb more easily.

and unlike the government handling of att due to a monoply, it will be the corporate that will be deciding the break up, as it should be.

because unlike GM, ATT was profitabe. You DON'T fuzt with something that isn't broken.

First thing they need to do is step on the unions. Even with the new rates a worker doing a labor and non skilled job makes far more than they are worth. The US companies can not be competitive when carrying the baggage.

For years the government came down squarely on the union's side in saying what they companies could or could not do while giving the unions free reign.

That is not an excuse for stupid management but stupid government complicates things. Obama and his bunch will back the union - one of their power bases.

you have to vote the union puppets out. Reagan came close, but with the dems jumping on Reagan shirttails, it really blurred liberal from conservative.

Basically they are like that already. Each division is treated like an independent company.

Notice Pontiac and Buick is no more, because GM was cutting out the non-profitable divisions.

thats for slapping me in the face......I'm awake now.

No organization should be allowed to become "too big to fail". Before even thinking about public bailouts, the first step should be to break them up into smaller units, such that failure of any particular entity will not have a major impact on society. If a company fails, the CEO should be required to repay all compensation he has received while at the helm of the failed entity, and forfeit all retirement benefits (if they did not save the company, what was the real worth of their contributions?). Including Presidents of countries drowning in debt.

I don't agree with the breakup part but on the compensation - To big to fail is a difficult thing to define - to an ultra-green that might be anything over 5 people.

1) There should be a basic package - maybe from 100,000 to 1,000,000 dollars - depending on job level and company size.

2) Compensation above basic (bonus) should be based on the companies performance on 1) current year, 2) past 3 years and past 5 years - and weighted to award long term performance - possibly 10% for the past year, 30% for the past 3 years and 60% for 5 year company performance.

And how would that be imposed.....government regulation maybe.

10%, 30%, 60&, what the heck is that,

Hey, how about making them turn a profit in stead. The way you do that is to liquidate.

One thing about union contracts is the parent company such as GM is liable for compensation. that unions cannot let them expire.....the company that is

BTW, what is ultra-green?

p911

By ultra green I mean to say the over unity bunch (among others) - anything they want to function is supposed to somehow become possible and desirable. They also are ardent admirers of whatever the current notion is. BPA being one of the the current bogeymen for them. Anytime a Hollywood type declares something is horrible they all start to bow and pray to the new god.

10% of bonus based on one years performance (profits) 30% based on 3 year company profits and 60% based on 5 year profits.

Russ

Ultra-green, I see, where does plaid come in?

I don't understand where does the bonuses come from? if from the government, why bonus something that turns a profit, where it should be profiting in the first place.

If its internal bonuses, that is way out of line. You pay someone to do their job, call me old fashioned, when you do a job you try to do it right the first time, and not get the job and not do it right until theres a bonus involved.

p911

The bonus comes from existing salaries - make it a low to moderate base of maybe 100,000 dollars for the head of the company. Others would be lesser.

If the company is doing great let the president make a few million - fine with me.

Make thier salaries performance based, and not so called competitive based, i.e. not what another poor performing company is overpaying

No argument there!

The bonus should be based on some long term measure of success, and not quarterly or annual profit. (And long term might be longer than 5 years--set them up for deferred bonuses, but only if the company has continued to do well since their tenure.)

I won't propose how to do that, but that should be the goal.

I'm just replying to you, because you're the last in line

Welcome to CR4

The kinds of bonuses we are probably discussing, are probably based on stock price

the structure of the tax system favors short term profit

taxing income makes, long term investment less attractive

Hi Kramer,

I aggree with your proposition but it will be never realized. They are in place and act in their favour or their pockets, isn't it? However, we voted for them. GM and Chrysler represent one of the two parties, isn't it?

Change as soon as possible the millionaire helper with the money of poor or poorer American workers who pay taxes. Get up and act at place of dream talking, Gil.

What's this thing about bonuses. Are you trying to say, that these people have taken a job and are no longer happy with they're salary. So they're holding something back, to use to extort a bonus from the company that employed them. If they're not happy with they're salary, they should go get another that pays better. You take a job at a salary and do that job to the best of your ability. Not hold your employer to ransom for a bonus.

If the employer doesn't like it or think it worthwhile then they can let the person go.

FACT - there is nothing wrong with a bonus providing the bonus is paid for something positive and not for driving the company down the drain as too often done at present.

Russ

You answered your own question, there is nothing wrong with a bonus due to superior performance.

But to give bonuses out for producing and not proforming is what the debate is about.

A top exec can produce but still can drive the company into the ground, on the other hand, a top exec that preforms can drive the value of the company up.

some people employee's can not separate the two.

Hello 123,

Don't forget agencies who negociate with companies for the CEO positions. The contracts are large with perks and bonuses for everyone. I have a question: Why a company need bureaucracy and highly paid CEOs, managers, and financial controllers? They are counter-productive, expensive people, and don't produce any money to the company. They are just costs.

Every company has a goal and ability to do something, so, they have to sell, design, and produce, in that order, to meet customers' satisfaction. In the car industry was not the way worked out. They designed, produced, and wanted to sell but the customers looked others' products to buy.

Also, today, slavery is non-existent, so, we don't need "union" that limite every worker's ability to do the best. Unions drive companies to bankruptcy. Performance is the only way to see work, which conduct to profitability.

I don't want to talk about compensation, bonuses, and other benefits for nobody. Perform and you get a satisfactory salary!

Also, I see big advantages when the size of a company is limited to its capacity by doing one or a few things only. It was already demonstrated that smaller company with focus on one or a few items to produce succeed easily compared to multi-national manufacturing and selling from salad dressings to airplanes. The best example is Coca Cola against Pepsico. One is specialized by doing one things, soft-drinks, being profitable against the other non-profitable, who makes everything from soft-drinks to donuts to hamburgers to full-meal restaurants and I forget.

I wish the next time, no one government help them to stay alive, Gil.

Agreed,

If we are going to be competitive in the world market, China comes to mind., the strength needs to have a solid foundation. We can't be subsidising a bloated company. Heck, we might as well be speaking French. ^{said with tongue in cheek.}

As far as China is concerned, they fast tracked their way to a super power, nothing wrong with that, but there will be, and it will come from the inside.

p911

China is doing the same thing that MITI did for Japan for years - give companies direction and herd them along seeing that they don't stray too much. Works wonders!

India does not have the monolithic government to do that kind of thing - they have to wallow along with everyone else trying to find direction.

Tried French classes one time - that was a medium disaster!

Russ

You obviously don't realize it, but China has gained its riches solely by stealing American, Japanese and European intellectual property.

That's it, there's no magic, no clever science, no clever technology involved here, it's simply raw fraud of the old fashioned kind.

They are not more clever or more wise, they are simply common thieves on a grand scale, and no one in the US seems to understand or care about this problem that has seen the hollowing out of the American industrial base.

American, Japanese and European companies are being defrauded by Chinese government officials 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, and that kind of persistent fraud has crippled the west's economies, and the west's politicians have gone along with it because it is not them who are suffering the consequences, they have padded their own positions with their kickbacks and their bribes that are paid in cash by the Chinese fraudsters.

I'm sick of hearing Americans admiring Chinese progress.

Wake up, dammit, there's a battle for survival taking place right under your noses.

The cowardly guest appears! Kind of like Zorro.

Who is admiring the Chinese? Simply stating how it works.

Oh' Poor, poor baby! Did you miss your pablum - meaning did you miss the daily radio talk show that so many depend on for their thoughts.

The loony right speakers that the unwashed masses depend on to do their thinking can't let such a travesty happen! After spoon feeding drivel to their followers they should not be allowed to miss a feeding.

It is business - stay ahead or lose - nothing more and nothing less.

Still spouting the same crap I see RUSS. If only life could be as great as that in RUSS's world.

who's admiring it?

I said in an earlier post, their time is coming. And I don't mean "Good Times".

And it will come from within....within China that is.

Wake up, dammit, there's a battle for survival taking place right under your noses.

One has to fight the problem, and stop blaming someone else, maybe we can fight it by exporting our fat CEO's....what a second....

Hi p911,

Thanks for the good words at the right place and time. People like to attack others but they do nothig to defend their interests.

When someone lost a patent's right to make a product and someone else can make for cheaper the losing person or company goes to by from the low price making, made in China. It's profitable for them for the buyers. We advertise: "Pay less and live better". It's true and it's good in business for everyone.

Oh! You want to become the biggest car-maker, television and computer manufacturer on Earth? Accept Deming's theory of quality production, let ego at home every morning, get paid on performance only, don't have union from outside of your company because you supply money for outsiders. Be productive as the Japaneses did, and the Chineses followed, and The Indians will do very soon, if not yes started!

"One has to fight the problem, and stop blaming someone else, maybe we can fight it by exporting our fat CEO's....what a second...."

Thanks for the excellent suggestion! You think they can do it? I am not conviced about it. People who just criticizes or blames others for their misery, they just cry but never act, Gil.

Apparently, the more they (do it to) us, the more we like it. Besides, I like my $1.00 tooth brush. How about you?

Hi Guest,

I agree with stolen intellectual properties. However, we, the losers, we buy everything made in Chine for less than we can make. Why? Because we don't want to make what is on the US or Western Patents? Or, we just see immediate profits and forget who steal, copy, and sell the patented items? Let me laugh for a second or two. We never made a blockade against made in China, low cost items? Again, why?

Please, give some logical answers to maintain the argumentation on stolen intellectual properties, Gil.

NB: I don't defend the stealers, just want to see what can do when someone loose something. Yes, the reaction!

Hi Guest,

How can we bankrupt Chinese industry producing objects by stolen intellectul property and sell to us? Us means American, Japanese, and European. It's the simplest thing to do: DON'T BUY MADE IN CHINA! It's short, understandable, and effective!

For example, I make through my business waterbourne stains and sealers, which can be copied by anyone. The secret of success is not by stealing the intellectual properties, the success come from the sales! I have customers and they don't! When you have the stolen intellectual property, you have nothing or just a paper. From there, the Chinese know that there is a market and the actual manufacturers don't want to do the objects because the high salary and other costs like rent, equipment, maintenance, finance, and others.

Think about: Why the Japanese car industry is well installed all around the world? Because there is a market, and the local manufacturers are making cars that not fit to this market. Go to China and you see Toyotas, VWs, and other Japanese but you see one or two GM as Cadillac for ministers or diplomats, and Chrysler is not translated in "putonghua" yet.

You see the picture?

Forget stolen papers, buy or don't buy is the choice, Gil.

Gee, a few facts would be nice, instead another drive by puff piece from an anonymous coward blogger

A bit of opinion tossed out to the dogs is supposed to keep us happy I guess.

The standard of blogging isn't helped by all the sites that have a button - 'Would you like to write for us? Please send a sample post. Experience not required'.

They are looking for clicks and as long as they don't get sued many sites could care less about 99% of the facts being either incorrect or missing.

The blog entries are just to round out the newsletter package, the question just fills the space in the bottom right corner. Interesting that the GS bloggers can start discussions that are bound to turn political, when the members are held to a different standard...

You answered your own question. Within a socialist Marxist government there are Winners and Losers that have nothing to do with free market and performance efficiency, or for that matter the customer. Got that comrade--go and be quite. The BHO's will tell you what you can or cannot do and at the same time tell you what great benefits they are giving you.---just toe the line---you dumb idiot---America on the "dole" is a "worker paradise" that will never end.

I believe we need to talk about the coming collapse and who and what to get rid of to stop it. Big government Unions would be the place to start eliminating. Should the autoworkers union be considered government employees? Like other government employees the taxpayer is paying their salaries.

Nothing wrong with getting rid of the auto workers union at all.

We have one good political description - the Loony Left

Now we need one for the right but I don't know a synonym for loony that starts with R. Anyone have any suggestions?

Hi Jack or Comrade,

I think within "free market and performance efficiency" there are at least 80% losers and less than 20% winners. Is there the same proportion in the "socialist Marxist" system?

Please, the 20%, you have to precise: CEOs, managers, and other financials "get" the bonuses and benefits. The larger, the 80%, the workers and others "making" the profits, bonuses, and benefits don't get nothing, except what the union scrape off.

There is no performance efficiency or other tricky word. We teached to others, mainly Japanese and Koreans, what is performance, quality, quality of work, and so on, but we don't want to learn it. So, now, I understand your words "you dumb idiot".

Everyone wants, the working class, non-unionized people that unions most disappear and get compensation only for performance but we vote for governments who help the same anyway. Yes, our money pay the unions. Well said,Gil.

Somewhere in your "bad" English an understanding of what you are trying to say may glimmer-- a little---somewhat like a dim bulb.. The confusion in your writing will however allow almost anything to be gleaned from it. Sort of like reading tea leaves. However If I may try again--- Free markets and capitalism is best and works very well in a pure form.

The "crony" capitalism that we now see under a primarily socialist "tent" in America as advanced by liberals/communist/socialist/progressives is not capitalism or a free market. It is worse than pure communism primarily because it is made to masquerade as "capitalism" or a free market and therefore subjects real free market capitalism to criticism it does not deserve. It allows for it to be destroyed by being declared "bad" under false witness---or lies.

This is the standard operating procedure for Marxism and other isms that create chaos and that step on individual freedoms and the rights to private property. Create class warfare amongst Americans. This Marxism is the corner pin of the BHO's (POTUS) who are mainly idiots. They would not be good at any ism---they are essentially non productive people cultivated in a AA, PC academic environment. They however are doing a lot of damage to America..

Capital (private investment) now still accounts for most of the productivity in America. Not Trade unions and certainly not the growing state and local government unions who produce nothing but inflated salaries and benefit packages negotiated within themselves and paid for by the taxpayer. It is almost criminal and the Unions are now subversive to America as most Americans know it. The last elections proved this---America is still conservative..

In the case of GM the capital value of private investors was essentially stolen (made worthless) by the Government of BHO who protected the Unions. It does not take a genius to know that a circumstance occurring like that will kill private invest in any business enterprise. America began a slow death throe and the parasites are now eating the host. The government essentially took private property, destroyed its value and gave it to the Unions who now are very subversive to the primary values of America. Good or bad English knows that America will be Kaput if this situation is allowed and continues on. If that is your objective then you may win or lose but the world will lose when American free enterprise no longer is viable.

Well I think Gil's English has improved out of sight.

And I think your post a bit "immediate" in evaluation.

The 'Detroit' woes go way back to the late 60's, early 70's. That's a lot of "governments".

IMHO Detroit lost to Toyota on;

A. "listening".

B. "design" (meaning manufacturing smarts and value engineering)

C. "re-investing" (meaning not tunnel vision on dividends for the snout in trough thinking that this "free enterprise" dogma engenders across 'investors', management and 'labor')

It may be an idea for you to look at the "package" a Toyota employee was on 'back then', and is on today.

Also 'back then' Toyota was making 40 cars/employee/annum.

Detroit was making 4.

Well said Charlie.

Cheers,

Stu.

Well - actually - back then Toyota used 'village based' craft as a manufacture base for something like 40% of components.

You could walk down some backstreet and see families making 'Toyota bits' on their porch or in their earth vestibule.

Yup. The race goes to the ones who are hungriest. We've been fat and happy for a few generations now, and the effects on us physically, economically, and intellectually are showing. Insatiable labor unions are part of the problem, as are myopic management, gluttonous consumers, ill informed voters, and the gridlocked government they have produced. Did I leave anybody out?

There are as I see it only a few things we can do about this mess: (1) become smarter consumers (2) improve our education system (3) cut our bloated overhead by eliminating the rent seekers (4) rebuild our infrastructure.

Good history lesson but the real lessons are in understanding Why it happened. For example WHY did American Run Companies become "Crony Capitalists" and essentially are being run by "bean counters" who bent over to Union demands. What caused that. Dig deeper.

Lack of competition made them lazy, it why it happened. After 1945, there was no competition for US manufacturing, for approximately 5 years. It took another 5 years for the rest of the world to wake up to the fact that there were better/cheaper alternatives. Meanwhile, Americans were resting on their laurels, without a thought to what the future might hold, while Demming (who was ignored in America) was off teaching the Japanese a "better way". As significant as what Demming was teaching was, anyone who is reading Demming today is reading ancient history...

Hi 34point5,

Thanks for the defense you point out in a simple discussion about GM's and Chrysler's survival! Thanks again!

Also, I don't care about the English, I want to understand what is said and answer to it with my point of view or opinion. Good or bad, it's only a judg(e)ment or opinion.

Your explanations are reflecting what and how people do to succeed in big corporations, talk well as do my critic. Deming was American but accepted by Japaneses. History tells us the truth!

I laugh but do things my way, Gil.

'In the case of GM the capital value of private investors was essentially stolen (made worthless) by the Government'

It seems to be that by the time the government 'stole' GM, decades of lousy management had reduced its value to somewhat less than zero. If you remember, that's why the government stepped in. Remember the Hummer? Now there was a quality management decision backed up by real engineering prowess. The only aspect of that disaster that showed any competence was the marketing. They understood that the public was still living in a fantasy world where we were still rich and powerful, and knew that we would jump at the chance to own such a symbol of status and power. Wonder how many people took out a second mortgage to buy one, and then lost both house and car? I agree with you about the crony capitalism, but that's neither Marxism nor Capitalism. It's just criminal.

You are right that 'free markets and capitalism...works well in a pure form'. Probably the same claim could be made about communism. The problem is that neither system will ever be tested in its 'pure' form because some of us are crooks. I think Adam Smith pointed that out in his Wealth of Nations, when he said that no sooner would you get two business men together in a room than they would start hatching a plot to screw their customers. If we had better people I think either system could work well, but we are who and what we are. It's well past time for us to abandon these worn out ideas that could only work in an ideal world, and think about what works in this flawed one we live in.

I think too many people have short time horizons. Something happens and they look around the room to see who did it. They think our present condition is the result of this group or that group, this political party or that one. I'm pretty sure that we are in this mess because we were ALL asleep at the wheel for about the last three generations. BHO (as you call him) is right on this: we need to stop looking backwards - we need to stop re-litigating our past squabbles. Bearded Marxist and Robber Baron alike, if we keep fighting with each other we will all end up as dirt farmers growing food for someone else's table.

Yes,

Yes,

and yes!

Stu.

There is no doubt that Canadian and US auto workers are overpaid on an international scale. Although, I think these pay rates are not necessarily unfair within the countries. We don't want to create a society of impoverished workers. The location of car factories are in industrial zones and have special problems in dealing with environmental and social problems. These added problems are usually absorbed by the municipalities or governing jurisdictions.

Unfortunately, as with textile industries of the not too distant past, it was quickly realized by the owners that they could use cheap labor abroad, and still sell their product gaining better profits. As with the textile industry, the auto industry is facing the same onslaught of profiteering. Cutting back wages of workers will not stop the momentum.

Things only seem to get worse, the Chinese have discovered that Mexico has free trade with 25 different countries and has ready access to these free trading resources. Add to that the savings of shipping vehicles from China to North America, and you will realize that they are poised to reap a huge economical advantage.

What can we do? It seems that the auto industry in the west will be challenged to remain in a strong position. Do we want to cut salaries to workers? Are we prepared to further destroy the municipality with decaying factories and citizen unrest? It would appear that we should be retraining workers rather than pouring +$$ into a seemingly lost battle. The options are tariffs and renegotiating free trade agreements that allow foreign owned companies to participate unfairly.

There is no doubt that Canadian and US auto workers are overpaid on an international scale. Although, I think these pay rates are not necessarily unfair within the countries.

For skilled workers but maybe 90% of the auto workers can not claim to be skilled! Assembly line positions are not skilled. People running machines are not skilled workers.

But you still keep on buying they're shine new product. Stop your whinning and live with it. Your a bit of a hypocrite really. Or is your jealously for they're salary tainting your view?

in a country where trash collectors make as much as teachers we will suffer more as we slide into second and then third world status, we in united states cannot allow the big three to become history, now that Ford and GM are building good reliable and economical cars and Chrysler is starting to show a profit we need to support them by buying American made products, we need to start making our own parts and assembling them into products for sale both in America and in other countries, we have lost our way in manufacturing in this country, evan the Bay Bridge is being rebuilt using steel and tower sections made in China, Obama needs to properly express this to the citizens in a way that is clear to us, We the people need to figure this out and buy American made products, we don't need 350 horses under the hood we need 45 mpg, we have the ability to do this and need to make it happen, the jump from 30 to 45 mpg will be easy compared to the jump from 45 to 60 mpg, there is no reason why gm sells more Buick's in china than it does here. the regal and the lacrosse are the 2011 flagship luxury us cars,unions are nice but we need to revamp what they are doing to America and fix it. in my years working on Peugeot's I found that making a few models well beat out companies that made a lot of models poorly,

Sincerely

MG retired Peugeot mech

now a registered unit of this site,

Why should we buy yours, if you won't buy ours. Very childish.

Here's some fairly scary stuff to consider. No mention is made of Gov't involvement or tax dollars being thrown around.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704865704575610771579286344.html?mod=WSJ_myyahoo_module

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/11/ge-to-buy-25k-electric-fleet-vehicles/

http://www.fastcompany.com/1669747/ges-wattstation-ev-charger-gets-a-dose-of-design-thinking-from-yves-behar

This all seems way too cozy to me.......of course, I'm a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

I don't find it unusual that GE would be promoting solutions that use their products,

if there are to be solutions other than gasoline/diesel, some of the subsidies these fuels enjoy will have to be shifted to other transportation support systems

I suppose. Of course GE stands to make billions in taxpayer subsidized contracts to install these things.

Here's North Carolina's solution to get off of fossil fuels. Wood powered cars anyone?

Oh joy........

I also wouldn't be a bit surprised to see the Chinese owning a controlling stake in GM within the decade.

In my very limited experience with an American company trying to gain a foothold in the Chinese economy, I learned, at least 10 years ago, that Chinese trade law requires any foreign company wishing to set up shop in the country must partner with a Chinese company. They cannot go it alone. I would guess that a minimum percentage of involvement is required. This may explain Obamas trip to China and shortly thereafter an arrangement where the partnering of GM with the Chinese is only at 1%. Some of the negotiations may have been about lowering the requirement in this particular case and maybe more to come, as the current economic climate is not favorable for established requirements. (Remember when, after Nixon's visit, trade barriers were eased in preparation for Hong Kong's absorption into China and the need to preserve our enjoyment of the fruits of Hong Kong's industrial output.)

I wanna believe Garthh. Please provide me with some evidence that I'm not being spoon fed a load of crap.

Look at GE's figures. Never is it included, the amount of fossil fuel it will take to send the juice to these cars.

Southern Ca already has rolling brownouts for crying out loud, how in the hell are they going to power all of these electric cars?

The fact that to go all electric, the service stations would have to be replaced is one huge task.

Only 25% replacement would still be a huge undertaking. The individual charging points is the least of the entire program.

1) generation capacity

2) distribution capability

Russ

Hi Blog Starter,

Yes, you are 100% right to let die automobile makers as mentined, and I would like to add an additional adjective-qualificative to your second sentence: "just to keep highly overpaid" and unproductive "autoworkers employed". It would be less expensive to the government to pay unemployment at place of high salaries. Also, bankrupted capitals, mainly equipment and factories will be bought by another car manufacturer, making another revenues for the government. It's little bit late to talk about but it can be effective within 2 to 5 years that all will happen again, Gil.

A bit off topic but the conversation is leaning towards China anyway. Before anyone goes off half cocked talking about trade wars with China you might want to ask Japan how that worked out for them. Japan seized a Chinese ship in disputed waters and refused to return it. China retaliated by cutting off exports of rare earth metals to Japan. These commodities are used in almost all high tech industries and China controls about 97% of the worlds production.

Before Japan allowed its own high tech industries to grind to a halt they quickly returned the ship to china along with it's crew and captian. You can call China what ever you like but don't call them stupid. While the western countries has been trying to make their plans based on the next election in 4 years China has been making plans for the next hundred years. They may be slow to get there but they will rule eventually. Actually isn't that how democracy is supposed to work? Majority rules?

FORD has always been more responsible to their Customers, than PROFITS, as a FAMILY CORP.of U.S. of A.

G.M. Is connected, to France. / / Chrysler is connected to the Vatican...

It would have been better if GM and Chrysler had been better run, had better products, and had not gotten into so much red ink. It would have been better if they had the decency to arrange to collapse at a time when the rest of the economy was in better shape. But it didn't work out that way.

The speculation I heard was that if GM and Chrysler went into bankruptcy that this would have also brought down the supply chain, making it hard if not impossible for Ford, Toyota, etc. to keep going. I'm in no position to prove or disprove that speculation.

I understand that bankruptcy would have let GM and Chrysler ditch their union contracts, and avoid the health/retirement plans for their already retired workers. This would have been good for the companies, but not so much for the current and former employees, and not so much for their mortgage holders, landlords, etc. It would also have been tough on the taxpayers who would have had the pleasure of paying for unemployment, retirement, and healthcare.

There is no question that some of these blue collar jobs were overpaid. But in our (formerly) bloated economy who wasn't? Wages in this country will have to go down, and skill levels with have to improve for us to become competitive again. The question in my mind is do we start at the bottom and create millions more homeless unemployed folks, or do we start at the top with the folks who were in a position to see this coming, but chose to ignore it? We just had an election, and the results are in: we'll start at the bottom.

Someyhing for you to think about... Labor ~ is nearly half of what it would be if not for Robotics... More robitcs ... Less Labor...

"Wages in this country will have to go down, and skill levels with have to improve for us to become competitive again."

You have hit at the crux of the issue. It is very hard to be competitive in a global climate if all things are not equal. I feel the world is moving towards economic parity. As countries like China, India, and Brazil gain in stature and prosperity, those countries that currently or recently enjoyed high standards must suffer a lowering of standards of living. And I believe you are right, the people in these countries will suffer from the bottom before the top will be affected. These rich few at the top control the ownership of the wealth.

In order to prepare a society for the new global competition, the society must become smarter. The Chinese are patient and smart enough to have a plan. They are slowly and somewhat quietly gaining control of precious resources. The west needs to move to exert its own economic controls. At the same time better train its populations to become ever better innovators of industry. I see no way that the west will be able to compete against the rising economies of the world with anything resembling assembly work. The problem with that is assembly work employs a heck of a lot of people. Had the US and Canadian governments not propped up the GM and Chrysler factories, a collapse of governments may have occurred. The governments would be bankrupt and a quick collapse would have been very hard to recover or endure.

I write from a Canadian viewpoint (our government invested 20% of the American level of investment in the auto industry), I feel we are essentially in the same boat. I keep hoping we are the lifeboat because America is really the elephant in the room (boat).

I think too few people in this country (US) understand this. Perhaps many business leaders and politicians do but they are reluctant to speak because it would seriously depress the housing and stock markets. So instead we get a steady diet of union bashing, big business bashing, govt bashing, and ignorant economic bs about taxes and interest rates. It will be hard to sustain a renewed commitment to improving education and repairing our infrastructure as the economy goes down the toilet. Much easier to mess with taxes and interest rates and try to engineer another asset bubble to make it look like 'economic recovery' is at hand. If people wise up, eventually our leaders will follow, but in the mean time we're having a tea party. Would you care for a cup?

What are you for?

no simplistic back to the constitution crap, which doesn't mean anything

a bunch of the money used to prop up the financial markets, has already been payed back. unlike the 1st chrysler bailout [which was repaid] this time there is some stock as collateral

And what has the financial industry used to pay back the money used to prop them up? Some more of that "funny money" that Bernacke insists on printing in ever-expanding quantities?

unlike the 1st Chrysler bailout [which was repaid] this time there is some stock as collateral //////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

The $ Borrowed By Chrysler to Buy American Motors was paid back with the JEEP CONTRACT... Making Jeeps!!! With-out even an American model (There is a crime in there some place...,) such as The Americana Coupe, Sedan, Convertible; or Sport H.P. Let alone smart enough to make a New American Battery Powered Model.

If you plug them into a coal fired power station, the overall return on fossil input is 7.25% - compared to 30 to 40% for ICE,

Plug them into PV and it runs about 85% of battery return.

For the concept to work - you need "charging in the car park at work" not "overnight" at home.

Otherwise it's "green going backwards".

You wrote, "If you plug them into a coal fired power station, the overall return on fossil input is 7.25% - compared to 30 to 40% for ICE."

Wow, that is horrible. Do you have a source for those numbers?

Actually I wrote this up, and most of what is being said in the post above yours, some 15 years ago.

But you don't need that tome, just some math and a little 'industry knowledge'.

The 'plug-in cost presumption' is always based on overnight recharging on "off peak" tariff.

The reason for 'off-peak' in coal power, is they can't shut down and recover before the am demand peak, so the conversion rate drops out of the bottom of the performance envelope.

Meaning the things run at 12-15% rather than 22-27% 'advertised efficiency'.

(Hence they look to boost demand by price, to get some return on the coal being wasted)

As you would know, typically electric traction systems get about half of the battery charge energy back. ipso facto 7.25%

Suppose I should have put a ~ or said "about", and done all the 90% and nits and picks, but it never much better, and obviously - often far worse.

That would explain why they don't want to publish that data in their literature.

I Hate Censorship!

"TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING ~ IS TOO MUCH!"

(Love is a Good Thing!)

Those figures CAN'T be right?

First you have to 'mine' the crude, transport it to a place where you 'make' gasoline. Then transport the gasoline to the user.

In the case of coal: mine the stuff and pulverise it on site, then transport it to the user.

Where'd you get the figures from?

Something's not right here.

Cheers,

Stu.

Stuey, what gasoline got to do with it?

If you want a comparison - it would be with a "clean coal" steam car and an "off-peak-re-charged-battery" car.

The steam car might win - if you don't factor in the coal to get it up to operational temperature - and don't include the losses of "clean".

There's a lot of real good sense there, John.

GA.

Cheers,

Stu.

GA. I suspect the tea at your party would be very good.

Kevin

Fair to middling, but we do boil the hell out of the water.

Well actually it's coffee...

Well actually it's mostly brandy and a little coffee...

_{You shouldn't boil coffee (or brandy)}

I knew I was doing something wrong.

Well put! It's damn sad that very little, if any, of what you just posted will ever happen.

No one seems to be waking up and smelling the coffee.

Yeah, it's pretty hard to market this stuff. Maybe we should write our Senators...LOL

sorry John, I mistook your comment as being in support of those silly people, who can tell you what is wrong without any plan beyond the usual fox news talking points.

You've done a fine job identifying some of the problem areas & at least offering up some direction

by parliamentary government, do you mean proportional control instead of our present winner take all lessor of 2 evils system, choose between slightly different sets of money=free speech special interest representatives???

you're spot on about the tax system favoring spending tomorrows money [ borrowing ] instead of yesterdays [saving]

You're on a roll, so I'll just sit here & sip my coffee, with a little soda over ice : D

_{"soda over ice" how? ice floats}

I think the ice should be placed in the glass 1st [ crushed ] a splash of "coffee", splash of soda, "coffee", soda

about this time the ice will woosh to the surface, minimizing the stratification without the need to mix...

John,

You are on a nice roll, so I'll keep it short. I don't think the Constitution is crap and I don't think the founders were full of crap.

They certainly were not gods either. But the one thing they understood, was the inherent danger of an all controlling, out of control government. The rapidly accelerating attempts to scrap the Constitution, in favor of a better way, involving a huge, kind and benevolent, big brother system of government has not shown itself to have any merit whatsoever.

GM & Chrysler......should have let them go bankrupt, (bankruptcy does not necessarily= failure), reorganize, possibly by merging, renegotiate union contracts and move on.