Comments on: Let Detroit go bankrupt

By: Scott -Ooltewah, TN

Scott -Ooltewah, TN — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:54:46 +0000

As much as I don't want to see the ill effects on the economy caused by a "Big 3" bankruptcy, I believe government should should "just say no" and stay out of the free market and private industry! After all, a free market is suppose to be, and will be, self correcting. Unfortunately, the Big 3 have had their "eye off the ball" for years, focusing more on excessive union contracts, executive benefits, and doing business status quo, then they have put time or design efforts into building a more efficient, technically superior product that the US consumer actually puts at the top of their want list. Bottom line-get in touch with our needs and build a higher quality, longer lasting, more efficient vehicle at a more competitive price, and I for one, will be there to buy it! – If it takes a chapter 11 restructuring for the Big 3 to cut out all of the "corporate fat" and become competitive again, so be it. -That's the beauty of how the free market works!

By: Rick Sidor

Rick Sidor — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:35:56 +0000

I agree that bailout is a bad idea, but why do politicians think that a temporary bridge to keep the economy afloat is a waste of taxpayer dollars? They claim the auto industry is "broken", but all we've heard the past two years in the presidential campaign is that government is broken. I'd suggest we eliminate a portion of the earmarks that Obama claims is immaterial. We give that to the auto industry and at least we all won't lose trillions in the markets. Then we try to figure out why we, as taxpayers, should continue to fund the lawmakers who are "broken". I want a job where after 6 years I receive full pension and medical benfits for life, even if I'm a failure. They complain about bonuses to Wall Street, but don't they receive the same? Perhaps if these lawmakers had main street problems, they'd understand the pain of their actions.

By: Big Joe Rice

Big Joe Rice — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:08:55 +0000

"It’s not the assembly line worker’s fault that the auto industry has been so poorly managed".

Certainly the management that permitted UAW wheel lug nut installers to make $28 an hour deserve blame, but just like the people making $50K a year that took on $500K mortgages, the overpriced UAW help had this day of reckoning coming just as the housing flippers did. Only delusional thinking could convince the UAW that their semi skilled labor was worth doctors salaries – and only incompetent management would sign up to accommodate them. The car industry jobs are gone whether via bankruptcy or attrition, so for Detroit and America there's either pain today or pain tomorrow – but there is still going to be pain. That's the sad truth of it....

By: cathy

cathy — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:46:11 +0000

Do you really think they want the bail-out? I mean they look like they have "deer-in the headlight – looks" on t.v. -" like this is all news to them " – they can't possibly be that stupid- have they been listening at all to anybody? Maybe they want to file for bankruptcy and then be free to renegotiate their U.A.W. contracts? They can't possibly be making millions of dollars a year and appear to be that stupid on t.v. – can they? Kinda sad. Why do they have to fly in private airplanes – are the Toyota executives in hot pursuit, are the Honda people trying to steal their secrets in mid-flight – or maybe Nissan is following them around reading their emails – renegotiation of U.A.W. contracts is what they are after This is a ploy and they are playing crazy like a fox!

By: Surafel Sacramento, CA

Surafel Sacramento, CA — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:35:21 +0000

You know I don't agree with the bailout but if they bailout bankers and lenders i think the auto makers should be also bailout too – but when we bailout we have to make sure that those chief executives salary have to cut like any executive $125-$150K. This is to all chief executive that we bailout and some of then should be faired! But we have to bailout bankers and automakers – even thought we should have help people who strike hard on this economy.

By: bdm

bdm — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:33:47 +0000

news of the CEO's of the Big 3 flying into DC in their private lear jets makes me sick to my stomach and settles it for me at least. let 'em sink...

By: Max H

Max H — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:18:45 +0000

I watch this on TV, read articales and one question keeps coming to mind. If you check the pay of the Top 10 of all three companies and total each companies Top 10 pay, WOW, I bet you could put a major dent in their debits. Also, when was the last time each on the the Top 10 got a paise raise? These are and will always be problems that exsist in major companies and their should be a cap on their pay and push it down to the lower levels. Their overstock on cars should not be allowed to reach a specific percentage. Many more thoughts on this.....

By: Jen

Jen — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:14:02 +0000

d, I feel for you. It's not the assembly line worker's fault that the auto industry has been so poorly managed. My opinion is that the responsibility of this crisis (which has been going on long before the current credit crisis), rests directly with both management AND the union. Keeping the auto industry running with the same infrastructure is just prolonging the inevitable – that the BIG 3 will continue the decline. Instead of giving the auto industry the "bail out", I'd rather set up funds for re-education and job creation for the individual workers to move into areas that will work for America in the long run – such as new energy exploration, off-shore drilling, even organic farming. America has to choose NOT to compete in an industry that they have screwed up, all on heir own. The opportunity starts with stopping the bleeding. Good luck, and head up. America is resilient and you are too.

By: Peach_Nectar

Peach_Nectar — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:08:29 +0000

Why should the auto industry get benefits that other industries do not? I work for a large fortune 500 company in CA. If I am let go, I get 2 months pay and 1 month health coverage. I would need to re-train for another industry. Life is tough.

Yes, the management at the automakers is terrible. The pay of executives should be based on company performance. An executive who is let go should get the same benefits as other employees. The use of luxury corporate jet is a non-negotiable part of these executives' contracts and they used it to beg for the bailouts!

Hourly wages, benfits, executive compensation, restructuring and everything else should be on the table. The only way it can happen is in Bankrputcy.

By: Jennifer

Jennifer — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:54:12 +0000

I honestly don't know if they should be bailed out or not, but I do know that I have questions regarding it. Didn't GM report some time ago that they were going further and further in the red with their vehicles? What changes did they make since then to try to help themselves out? And I heard Barnie Frank, this morning, say that come March they could possibly qualify for additional funding. How much are we actually talking about for it is more than the 25? Before I, personally, can be okay with it, I need lots of answers to lots of questions.

By: Anthony Urrabazo

Anthony Urrabazo — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:52:13 +0000

Bail them out so they can still fly around in their fancy jets and million dollar bonuses. Sure, but let them take the hit in the bonus section to pay back the money owed at no cost to the consumer.

By: xtina, chicago IL

xtina, chicago IL — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:41:28 +0000

Mitt is right.

And the government is not responsible for finding jobs for people.

The unions have ruined and spoiled this industry. But this is America; why doesn't some up and comer look at how successful auto makers are running their companies? The free market is the answer- not to force taxpayers to pay for a failed formula.

By: Gene Penszynski from Vermont

Gene Penszynski from Vermont — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:38:32 +0000

OK Mitt are you prepared to offer JOB TRAINING for the 3 Million Americans that will be structurally unemployed by this act ?????? and are you willing to pay the unemployment insurance and welfare benfits for said unemployed when they can't find work to make ends meet ???????

By: Jacky

Jacky — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:47:40 +0000

I live in Michigan and it seriously disturbs me that Mitt Romney of all people said this. If the big three don't get this bailout you can kiss this state goodbye! This state is already struggling, and besides the millions of people employeed directly by the companies there are millions of others that are indirectly employed by companies that make parts for them. My father worked for GM my step-father worked for GM (both retired) my mother works for a company that makes parts for the big three, and my father in law works for a company that also is connected to them. I work at a restaurant and 90% of my costumers are connected to the car industry, and I live in a small town 80 miles north of Detroit.
I think the bailout should only come with conditions, and the companies need major reconstruction, but if they go under this whole state is gone. We already have staggering forclosure rates, higher than the national average, unpresident unemployment rate. If the big three goes under you might as well give up our electoral voptes cause this state is gone!

By: Charlotte D

Charlotte D — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:43:25 +0000

I agree that a managed bankruptcy makes more sense to me than a bail out that permits the auto industry to keep on doing what they are doing with no incentive to change. However, doing this on the backs of existing retirees or those who are close to retirement is not right. People worked their jobs and planned their retirement based on certain expectations and now to pull the rug out from under them when they have few options to recover, will force more aging baby boomers into poverty and onto social services programs. Who is going to retrain and hire a 55 year old? No one. They will be greeters at WalMart and still have to be on food stamps. However, setting a sensible age cap for making changes makes sense and gives workers time to adapt and make other plans re their finances. Other than your statement re retirees, I am with you Mitt.

By: d

Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:09:59 +0000

Hey MattH, My husband worked for GM for 30 years and didn't even come close to making $78 an hour. When you speak of full benefits, they were left major medical and no doctor visits. As far as the quality of the cars from the assembly line, it was 110%. Asked the big 3 where the parts were manufactured. NOT IN THE USA. The 100% over pay went to the CEO's who couldn't read between the lines.

By: MattH

MattH — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:47:23 +0000

Allow the big 3 to go into bankruptcy, use the bailout money to pay the lost pensions. Under the bankruptcy, government forced actions to eliminate the union and pensions – no more hourly employee doing minimum wage work for $30 an hour and full benefits! This will give them a fresh start with hopefully better leadership building cars America and foreign countries want at lower prices. We can not compete with foreign car manufacturers under the same conditions. Honda building a car in the US is paying on avg. $38 an hour per employee while GM is paying $78 an hour. We are building lower quality cars and paying the employee over 100% more for poor craftsmanship? Government needs to protect the people, not the company. This will allow a fresh start on level playing fields.

By: d

Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:40:58 +0000

Here is the truth about the high paid autoworkers:
The average pay for an assembly worker is $28 per hour
The average pension for a forced retiree is $3,000 a month
The average age of a forced retiree is 55 years old
At 62 GM reduces the pension to $1500 and Soc.Sec. Pays $1500
Medical was reduced to major medical w/no provisions for doctor’s visits unless they meet a $500 deductible.
There is a 7-year gap before most retirees can go on Medicare.
There are hundreds who have dependents covered on their health care and hundreds who can't afford a well care visit for their children.
They don't and can't apply for family health care because they don't meet the criteria or can't afford to pay.
NOW! if the big 3 go out
WE LOSE EVERYTHING WE WORKED SO HARD FOR ALL OF OUR LIVES.
IF THERE IS A GOVERNMENT BAIL OUT, WE NEED TO PROTECT THE WORKERS, THEIR PENSION AND THEIR HEALTH CARE.
NOT THE SALARIES OF THE CEO

By: Brent, San Diego

Brent, San Diego — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:35:09 +0000

I would like to see Governor Romney go back into the private sector and lead GM or Chrylser through the next 2-3 years. He has a talent for turning around failing enterprises (corporations, Winter Olympics) and it seems fitting that he should be asked to do it again.

By: Samantha

Samantha — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:34:43 +0000

First the mortgage companies and banks, now the auto industry.
What next? It seems to me that everyone is looking for a "bailout". I don't think forking over our tax dollars is the right solution to the problem. After all, the American's lacking ability to pay is what landed us in this hot water anyways. Rather than making a plan that benefits only the major companies that have made poor business decisions why not make a plan that benefits the taxpayers as well? My solution to help the auto industry: Give each taxpayer a voucher towards the purchase of a car made by one of The Big Three. Putting our tax dollars into vouchers for news cars would benefit American taxpayers as well as help the auto industry get the boost in sales they are looking for.