Chrysler, GM and Ford sales are all up. GM is back to being the worlds largets
automaker. I wouldn't be caught dead in a Toyota or Honda. I don't
care what they claim they are not ameican car companies. We are capable of
building quality cars in the United States. If GM and Chrylser had collapsed
they would have taken our entire economy down. Think of every dealership as a
small business, the backbone of our economy. It was Bush Jr. that was
responsible for TARP and the auto bailouts, not Obama.
RE: Joe Blow Interesting proposal that you make, but I would be one on the
other side, who would reject your idea. Unlike most of your leftists comrades, I
actually think YOU have an honest heart, with good intentions. That being said,
there is in your proposal, a strong hint of limiting free speech. There is also
a little bit of a bait and switch scenario, because of other factors that you
don't mention. The president (and congress) can still spend money, just to
buy votes. It doesn't have to be for campaign donations. And in the other
area of free speech, we have the issue of the press. As much as you might want
to deny it, we have at least six networks who are a big part of the Obama pep
squad. They try to deny it of disquise it, but they are a big part of his
campaign, and they don't cost him a penny. On the other side, you have one
network, who might accurately be accused of bias, but more appropriately
provides balance. How are you going to fix this situation?
So if Romney wins will the deseret news publish my letter with the title,
"Romney serves himself and rich friends with more tax cuts?"
I thought buying American and supporting American jobs was a good thing. Must be
a Romney supporter.
With all due respect, Frank's letters are more about entertainment value
than substance. And my chev pickup has about 288,000 union built miles on it. I
think the US auto industry is worth saving.
This is totally irrelevant, but . . .I've owned a Ford. High
maintenance.I've owned a Chevy. Hunk of junk.I've owned a
Honda. Very well built.I've owned a Subaru. It was okay, but I
won't ever buy one again.I've owned another Ford. Good vehicle.
We got lots of mileage out of it.I currently own a Geo (GM product with a
Toyota engine) that my kids have driven to high school and college. It's
falling apart, but it still passes inspection every year.I own a Hyundai
that my kids have also driven. It's okay, but we had to replace the
engine.I own a Dodge minivan. It is okay but is obviously not a
high-quality product.I own a Nissan truck. I've driven it 115,000
miles, and it has never had a tune-up. Runs like new. It'll be getting a
tune-up this month and a new timing belt (preventive maintenance). Best vehicle
I've ever owned.My mechanic, who is a very good engine mechanic and
works on every make and model, loves GM products. For what it's
This letter is factually inaccurate in its every detail. The United Auto
Workers did not receive stock. The company that administers their pension funds
is now a minority shareholder--they were always a stakeholder in the deal.The union didn't like the deal. The hardest part of the deal was getting
them to sign off on it. The main factor in the Obama
administration's deliberations was the fear of collateral damage; parts
suppliers, dealers. They had to weigh moral hazard (bailing out a mis-managed
company) against waves of unemployment. Fortunately, the President made the
right call, incurring some political damage in the process.
"This "bailout" was nothing but another band-aid to rescue a union.
"That is a possiblility. Is the logic here that unions donate
heavily democratic and the president was returning favors?I have a
solution to that. How about we band together, grass roots like, both R , D and
I and find common ground on this one thing. Money in politics
corrupts. Union money corrupts. Corporate money corrupts. Lobby money
corrupts. And large individual donations corrupt.Can anyone
disagree with that?So, how about we ALL push for federal funding of
elections. And we all work to stop Union and Corporate and Lobby donations to
congressmen. And we all work to undo what the Citizens united ruling did.Look, I am not trying to give one party an advantage. Without the
money (bribery) either party would do significantly better than they do
today.Anyone NOT with me here?My premise is that ALL
money corrupts our politics. Not just the money given to the other side.What say you Mr Richards?
Truthseeker,Thanks for the clarification. I never intend to
"play with the numbers", but this morning I was fixing computer problems
for two remote customers when I was scanning the data. That's not an
excuse, just a reason.(I left out Chrysler because I didn't
have time to find a ten-year sales average for comparison. It looks like
Chrysler had a rough year in 2011 and a good year in 2012, which MIGHT account
for its listing.)Let's look at this from another point of view.
If two-million buggy-whip makers were facing layoffs and the government
"rescued" them by buying two large buggy-whip companies, would we cheer
the government for "saving" those jobs, or would we wonder if those in
charge had lost their minds? How many buggy-whips does a country need?If a company can't sell its cars, is it because the perceived value was
less than the asking price? Other car makers were not having serious
problems.This "bailout" was nothing but another band-aid to
rescue a union. Union people are important, but are they to be favored over
policemen and teachers who lost their pensions?
re:Redshirt"According to the LA times, the foreign car manufacturers
that you list are building new plants in the sourthern US."From
the same LA Times article you cite:"Wages vary by company and
geographic region, making exact comparisons difficult. Average labor costs,
wages and benefits, for the unionized Detroit automakers and nonunion
Toyota's U.S. plants are about the same at $55 an hour, according to the
Center for Automotive Research. But the rest pay less; nonunion Honda pays about
$50 an hour. Nissan, Hyundai and Kia are at about $45."In 2006,
at Toyota’s Georgetown, Ky., plant, workers averaged more in base pay and
bonuses than UAW members at Ford, General Motors and Daimler Chrysler, according
to the Detroit Free Press. The difference was due to profit-sharing bonuses.A final note on all this: Labor costs only account for about 10 percent
of the cost of producing a vehicle. (factcheck)
To "LDS Liberal" I hate to tell you this, but most Toyota vehicles in
the US are manufactured in the US by NON-UNION workers. This has given Toyota a
price advantage of about $2000 per vehicle because the non-union workers cost
about half the amount that union workers do.According to the LA
times, the foreign car manufacturers that you list are building new plants in
the sourthern US. See "Who wants a union? Not Southern autoworkers, it
seems" in the LA Times.This was again reiterated by Reuters
article "UAW sees its future: organize Southern US plants" where we find
that Toyota, Nissan, Kia, Mercedes, VW, and BMW run non-union plants here in the
US.I am proud of my non-union built Toyota.
re:MikeRichardsOk, i think I located your data. It appears you
mixed up the figures.For Ford and GM you quoted figures for the year
2011-2012.For Toyota, Honda etc. you quoted figures for June 2011 compared
to June 2012. Comparing apples-to-apples using WSJ:GM
4.3%Ford 6.6%Chrysler 30.3%Toyota 28.7%Honda 15.4%Nissan 14.4%Hyundai 10.5% etc. The fact
remains:Obama threw a lifeline to the U.S. automakers when the economy was
shedding over half-a-million jobs each month and credit was nowhere to be found.
It was the right thing to do at the time. Romney is free to disagree,
although he has been all over the map on his record. It is false
that Obama gave the car companies to the unions. "Just as the
government did not give GM to the union, it did not give Chrysler to
lost in dcernie can't handle the truth. he loves the community
organizer. the sad thing is he must be part of the 49% THAT DON'T PAY
@LDS LiberalForeign automakers manufacturing in the U.S. are
operating under the Free-Market Capitalistic system. American auto-makers
aren't. To compete in the U.S. they had to make cars that were
more reliable, more efficient, more dependable than what the FREE MARKET was
offering. So they did - and they succeeded. At the same time - American auto
makers were sitting on their thumbs - thinking they had the place on lock.Yup - there is a free market system at work here, and we see that
American Auto makers got BEAT.
I hate to break it to Mr. Teerlink, but Japan and S. Korea are more unionized
and are far more subsidized by their governments than our own.If
you're trying to make a case of the superiority of "free market"
car companies, I definitely would avoid including E. Asia.In fact,
it pretty much sinks your argument Mr. Teerlink.Calling Japanese and
Korean car companies free of unions, government involvement, etc is like calling
Afghanistan free of violence, corruption, and injustice. Or like
calling Mitt Romney a steady leader who never flip flops.
@TruthseekerThe UAW became a part owner of GM as a result of the
bailout. They are now owned and operated by the government, the union, and the
stockholder.The bailout guaranteed the perpetuation of union power
and control of this company.
@TruthseekerWho bought tens of thousands of GM cars in the month of
June. THE GOVERNMENT. Biggest sales month? eh... Chrysler
isn't even American owned any more. It was bought by a Euro car company
AFTER the bailout. Any of their success cannot be attributed to the bailout.
It is laughable that even after a bailout they still needed to be bailed out -
this time instead of the government buying them out, the people across the pond
Truthseeker,Google "car sales in america". The Wall Street
Journal has the figures.Using Obama Motors figures as proof that
G.M. is doing well is just like listening to Obama tout Obamacare. The figures
mean nothing when they are not compared to other car makers. Americans are not
switching TO G.M. If anything, they are switching FROM G.M.An
honest President would not have told us that G.M. had repaid its TARP loan when
the fact is that G.M. paid PART of the total TARP loan using other TARP funds!
Too many people blindly take Obama's words as fact. The
unfortunate truth is that Obama lies. Credible news reports are showing just
how much Obama lies. The Wall Street Journal clearly shows that G.M. is NOT
doing much at all when compared to the car makers that make the cars that
Americans are buying.
...who pay their union dues that go to support Obama. It's called money
Serving your friends is not bad. I serve my friends all the time. However, a
public officer (especially the President) needs to serve the public. It comes
with the territory. There haven't been many recent Presidents that have
been able to serve the public in this way very well. I would like to give Gov.
Romney a chance. It is very clear Pres. Obama won't be able to do it.
Claim by Romney: The President gave the auto companies to the UAW.Fact: What tips Romney’s claim even further from reality is the fact
that the union itself does not own any GM or Chrysler stock. The trust that
manages health benefits for retirees is the stockholder, and it is independent
from the UAW. It is not a majority shareholder in either company, nor does it
have a vote on the board.All the experts we talked to agreed that
Romney’s statement is just flat wrong. Our ruling: False.(politifact)
Ernest T. Bass.Please be honest - you may have a difficult time with
that if you listen only to the Obamamania media.The money spent on
wall street was not free; it was in the form of preferred stock purchases which
required a 5% dividend to the treasury for the first 5 years and 9% thereafter.
Most banks retired their CPP money (the bank capital purchase portion of TARP)
and also had to retire warrants, which the treasury profited thereby.Of the money spent to buy bank stock, treasury has made AT LEAST $13 billion.
Of the TARP money spent on Gm and Chrysler, pre-bankruptcy, none will be
recovered. The April 2012 SIGTARP report to congress says treasury lost over
$9.3 billion of TARP investments in the automakers - signed off by bush, but BO
voted for and supported.Table 2.3 of the SIGTARP report shows
estimates by the CBO and OMB that treasury will GAIN from $7 Billion to $17
Billion on the CPP.Please stop with the untruths that wall street
got free money. my source is not your hated Fox news, but the Special Inspector
General for TARP - appointed by your beloved BO.
Wayne RoutEl Paso, TX At one time I would only by USA cars, now I
will never by a union made car because I know a part of the price I pay goes
directly to the DNC and to support causes I oppose.==============
As opposed to buying what?Union made cars by SOCIALIST or
COMMUNIST countires?Japan, German, Italy, British, Korean, I
know I know, Because you feel it's better that ALL your money goes to
Socialists and Communists rather than a few pennies finding it's way back
America and the UAW - everything you oppose.This is the pathetic
illogic I see from ultra-Cons.Cutting off the nose to spite the face.Directly supporting Socialists and Communists, While accusing some
blue-collar Americans of becoming or even hnting a trace of any form of
Today we own a Toyota Avalon with over 130,000 miles on it and it runs like a
fine watch. It replaced our Cadillac.J. Rulon TeerlinkSalt Lake City=========== If what you say is true -
then, You are without a doubt confirming that vehicles -- made by
Japanese and German UNION workers, in SOCIALIST countries, at TWICE
our dollar rates, are inf act better than the Capitalist, Free
Market, Anti-union vehicles made in America? Beware -- Remember when all those cheap Japanese items hit and flooded our markets? The Communist Chinese will be next.They are following the sucess of
Japan to an economic tee....
1 conservative.."Even union members (and other beneficiaries of the Obama
largesse)know that we need someone who can actually create jobs WITHOUT the use
of public funds."..There were no private funds in '09..there were no
private funds in '09..ther were no private funds in '09..there were no
private funds in '09..and by the way..there were no private funds in
'09. Show me where that is wrong then we can have a discussion about
whether the government should have saved 1 million jobs, not until.
1conservative:I don't recall a single poll saying that Walker
was going to lose in Wisconsin. Most gave him a slight lead through the recall
campaign and it wasn't until the day of the election that it was supposedly
tied.I know it may be hard to tell in Utah and that the media loves
its' the-race-is-neck-and-neck story, but look at the state-by-state polls
and the electoral math you'll see that Romney has a real uphill climb to
winning. Take Ohio, Virginia, and Florida: all Obama has to do is win just one
of those states and he wins a second term. Romney has to take all three.
Certainly the main motivation of Obama was to protect Union wages and jobs.
Keep in mind that Obama stole the investments of GM bond holders who would have
been first in a bankruptcy settlement in favor of protecting the political
donations of the UAW. At one time I would only by USA cars, now I will never
by a union made car because I know a part of the price I pay goes directly to
the DNC and to support causes I oppose. Obama lies...GM has not paid back all
they "borrowed" and do not consider their obligation to the bond holders
in their statements of profitability. They produce the Volt only for Obama and
loose money on every one. The media fails to cover the true story of the Volt
fires and pretend that the sales are terrific. Much of the sales of Volts are
government and large corporations like GE. They do make great boat anchors.
Re:MikeRichardsWhere did you get your figures?General Motors,
the nation’s largest automaker, said that its sales increased 15.5 percent
in June, to 248,750 vehicles, which the company said was its best monthly
performance in nearly four years.Chrysler reported a 20.3 percent
increase over the previous year, its best June sales since 2007.(NY Times
Google "G.M. bailout" and you'll see that giving a large percent of
the company was the LEAST of the fraud committed against America.G.M. got about $50 billion in TARP money.G.M. got another $30
billion from the government who now has "stock" in G.M. Who gave the
government authority to "invest" that $30 billion in G.M.?G.M. got a tax CREDIT of $45 BILLION, which was illegal. Section 382 of the
tax code doesn't allow that credit, but that didn't stop Obama. He
had the Treasury Department head, Timothy F. Geithner (who was caught by the IRS
for evading taxes), issue a series of "Notices" declaring that section
382 did not apply regarding G.M.Last year, when G.M. had its largest
profit in history, $7.6 BILLION, it received a check from the IRS for $110
MILLION, as part of that illegal tax credit!Dig deep and see the
fraud committed in just that ONE AREA. Everything Obama touches smacks of
Americans are the reason the bailout was necessary. If folks had been willing
to purchase GM cars PRIOR to the bailout, you'd not have seen it happen.
Cash-for-clunkers should have been limited to US automakers. Insead litterally
hundreds of millions of dollars went to Japan because people had to drive a
Toyota, Honda, Subaru, etc. I've purchased a few cars in my time, but
never a foreign one, with a single exception. The big issues IS NOT who builds
the vehicle, but which companies get the huge PROFIT from each vehicle and in
which country is the company making those rip-off gains located. Get a clue,
Nothing compared to 9/11, Afganistan, Iraq and no bid contracts helping Bush and
Cheney's friends. Obama is a mere amature at helping his "buddies".
"pragmatist.." Are you referring to the same "polls" that
showed Scott Walker LOSING in Wisconsin? Most of the "polls" are
useless in that they are generated by the Obama pep club (the mainstream
press).Even union members (and other beneficiaries of the Obama
largesse)know that we need someone who can actually create jobs WITHOUT the use
of public funds. As much as union leaders would like to accompany their members
into the voting booths - they can't!
By that logic, Bush's free money to the banks and Wall St did nothing but
give money to his buddies.
Every president has done this. My bet: If Romney is elected he will do it to.
Flexing the muscle of the office (POTUS) for your own gain is as American as
I have purchased two new American cars since the bailout, both Fords, both built
by union workers in American factories - one in Warren, Michigan, and the other
in St. Paul, Minnesota. Thanks, Ford, for pulling yourself up by the bootstraps
and making yourself profitable.
"My economic advisers believe that such a collapse would deal an
unacceptably painful blow to hardworking Americans far beyond the auto industry.
It would worsen a weak job market and exacerbate the financial crisis," he
said. "It could send our suffering economy into a deeper and longer
recession."- George W. Bush, December 18, 2009
So saving 1 million jobs in the middle of a recession is a) a political
manuever, and b)a bad thing, because maybe 20% of those jobs were
"union"..ooooooooh, jobs? 1conservative..Romney really
can't win the election without winning Ohio, the state that benefited most
from the auto bailout, so do you really think Ohio is going to vote for Romney
who opposed the government action? Check the polls, not going to happen.
Obama Motors is not competing well most "big name" car companies.
They're loosing big time.G.M. domestic car sales is up 4.3%
from last year.Ford, is up 6.6%Toyota domestic car sales
is up 44.9%Honda is up 25%Nissan is up 12%Korea's car makers are competing very well against Obama Motors.Hyundai is up 13.2%Kia is up 36%Mercedes-Benz is up
16.8%Volkswagon is up 40%Audi is up 16%BMW
is up 11%Ether Obama doesn't know know to sell cars, or
Americans are refusing to buy cars from a company that was seized from its bond
holders and given to the unions.
The auto bailouts are just one of many reasons why we will be voting in a NEW
president in November.November can't come soon enough.
Mr. Teerlink apparently is not aware of Japanese industrial governance. The
Japanese were the first modern welfare state and their industries, including
automobiles, are controlled by interlocking directorates indlucing government
officials. So Mr Teerlink's depiction of Obama union cronieism vs free
enterprise Japanese hides a whole lot of facts. Over the short term Obama did
the right thing in competing with the Japanese.