Let GM Fail

by: James West November 17, 2008 | about stocks: GM    
James West

James West

About this author:
Become a Contributor Submit an Article
  • Font Size:
  • Print

I expect this article will make me in the neighborhood of at least 300,000 new enemies. That’s how many employees GM has. However, the unfortunate thing about truth is that it is relentless and apathetic. Please don’t confuse the messenger with the cause.

The reason GM should be allowed to fail is because in its current state, its production overcapacity, if maintained by government money, can only churn out even more cars that nobody wants or can afford to buy. In other words, it would only prolong the inevitable.

The fact that its management team clung to the illusion of perpetual growth and refused to acknowledge the irrefutable business cycle demonstrates gross incompetence, the result of which should be annihilation. That’s what’s going to happen regardless of how much money is pumped into General Motors or the economy in general. It is the excess liquidity in the system that exacerbates the peaks and troughs of natural business cycles, and so pouring more and more into the system only confounds the economy’s natural ability to repair itself through an unfettered continuation of the cycle.

Bear in mind that all that GM represents is not going to disappear in a puff of smoke if they declare bankruptcy. The assets will merely be re-allocated to other automotive corporations, and the industry itself will become slightly more efficient, and contract as it needs to. Autoworkers who are skilled and reliable will have to add resourceful to their repertoire to stay viable in a contracting economy. There are just too many autoworkers and zippo demand for their product.

Since everybody’s had access to all the cheap liquidity for nearly a decade now, and has got two cars and a parking lot full of brand new recreational vehicles (if they haven’t yet been located by repo man), pumping capital into GM is like trying to continue filling up a bathtub with water after its already full. It only makes a big mess, the water is wasted, and the more you continue trying, the bigger the mess gets and the more the resource is wasted.

The situation we’re in should be a plain signal to the world’s leaders that over-capacity across all industries, fuelled by years of near-zero cost credit, is the result of excess liquidity. The economy, contrary to modern economic theory, simply cannot expand ad infinitum no matter how cheap money is. This only causes overproduction of resources, overproduction of products, and volatility in the business cycle.

On the off chance that isn’t clear enough, hear it is again:

Perpetual economic growth is impossible.

I think this is the fundamental flaw in all of our G8 leadership’s assumptions. If we were to allow the economy to undulate in terms of growth and contraction in a uniform wave pattern, much as nearly all natural systems in biology and physics do, then our existence perhaps becomes sustainable.

The current economic policies cause artificially high concentrations of demand because the net result of excess speculation on the long side in any market creates the illusion of physical demand, which in turn promotes productivity. We end up consuming our finite natural resources prematurely, and the truly destructive effect will be felt more acutely as generations progress. Imagine your grandson or granddaughter trying to buy real estate or gas or gold after decades of increasing real demand (population expansion) and diminishing production of everything due to shortage of raw materials. Imagine the prices.

Trying to force continuous and perpetual economic growth through credit and monetary expansion is just plain suicidal, in the long term. It aggravates peaks and troughs into angry jagged lines that inflate the casualties both human and economic obscenely. The revision in economic policy required to facilitate that reality does not, at this time, appear to be forthcoming. At least, not while George Bush is still flapping his gums and swaggering around the podium playing president.

His address to the G20 meetings makes it clear that he is still preoccupied with asserting U.S. unilateralism when it comes to joint foreign policy decisions. I don’t know what the G20 leaders were hoping for. This meeting should not have happened until Obama was in the driver’s seat. I’m sure they all realize that now. It's clear that Bush seeks to establish credit for initiating the recovery that also is not yet forthcoming.

Related Articles

This article has 116 comments:

  •  
    Nov 17 04:04 PM
    "if maintained by government money, can only churn out even more cars that nobody wants or can afford to buy"

    Start out with that comment - and it makes you a Moron. Pure and simple. GM outsells all comers in North America. Cars that Americans are buying. It's funny how we can't stereotype people any longer - as it's been proven that - for instance - calling all poor people stupid isn't all that truthful. Taking out your wide tipped marker and painting all of GM's vehicles as being 'cars nobody wants to buy' shows the same sort of stereotyping ,and a lot of ignorance. Get over yourself, and stop attempting to pass off your opinion as fact. Opinions are most often not fact. Especially in the case of yours'.

    There are plenty of Americans that want to buy a GMC Acadia. There a tons of them that want to buy a Chevy Malibu. Quite a few want a Cadillac CTS. The Buick Enclave is selling very well, under 30 days of inventory even in these market conditions. Their pick-ups and Tahoes/Suburbans are the best of their breed. Look at the here and now, and not the 90's when trying to sum up GM's product offerings. The here and now is impressive.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:31 PM
    James West, you are damn right and that's what I want to say. I can say that GM/FORD cars is only can be sold in U.S but not the other part of the world. Because of it's high labor cost compare to Japan car maker ($78/hour VS 44/hour). The only reason why they still can make car is the protection policy of the U.S. government for import car.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:35 PM
    Just like the circle of life; when an animal dies the scavengers consume its carcass and later get eaten themselves by a predator.

    GM will be ripped into little pieces and sold off to entrepreneurs who can and will run the smaller business more efficiently. In the next economic boom these businesses will themselves be swallowed up by the larger conglomerates and so on…
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:37 PM
    I agree, GM's quality is as good or better than anything out there right now, even Toyota! GM was building the SUV's and trucks that everyone wanted, and they built millions of them. Its not GM's fault that the economy has sunk and gas went to $4.00, and all those millions that wanted that suv or truck ,can't afford to drive it anymore.


    On Nov 17 04:04 PM dpro0102 wrote:

    > "if maintained by government money, can only churn out even more
    > cars that nobody wants or can afford to buy"
    >
    > Start out with that comment - and it makes you a Moron. Pure and
    > simple. GM outsells all comers in North America. Cars that Americans
    > are buying. It's funny how we can't stereotype people any longer
    > - as it's been proven that - for instance - calling all poor people
    > stupid isn't all that truthful. Taking out your wide tipped marker
    > and painting all of GM's vehicles as being 'cars nobody wants to
    > buy' shows the same sort of stereotyping ,and a lot of ignorance.
    > Get over yourself, and stop attempting to pass off your opinion as
    > fact. Opinions are most often not fact. Especially in the case of
    > yours'.
    >
    > There are plenty of Americans that want to buy a GMC Acadia. There
    > a tons of them that want to buy a Chevy Malibu. Quite a few want
    > a Cadillac CTS. The Buick Enclave is selling very well, under 30
    > days of inventory even in these market conditions. Their pick-ups
    > and Tahoes/Suburbans are the best of their breed. Look at the here
    > and now, and not the 90's when trying to sum up GM's product offerings.
    > The here and now is impressive.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:42 PM
    When you write something that is an outright lie or mistruth, you insult on many levels while proving you have NOT researched your opinion. You said:

    "...cars that nobody wants or can afford to buy"

    GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the United States last year and holds a U.S. lead over Toyota of about 560,000 so far this year. Globally, GM in 2007 remained the world's largest automaker, selling 9,369,524 vehicles worldwide -- about 3,000 more than Toyota.

    S0 would you say Toyota is also building cars that nobody wants to or can afford to buy?

    And your attitude about a parking lot full of recreational vehicles REEKS of steroetype. You conveniently leave out the thousands of employees like me whose recreation is playing with my kids on the front lawn. ONE INCOME family here. I drive a van. No boat. No sports car. No motorcyle. No ATV. No snowmobile. No cottage. ANd I live in a 1600 sq ft house with a small yard in Warren Michigan.

    Who the Hell gave you space to spew your LIES?

    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:42 PM
    And where were you when the tax payer was forced to bail out the financial industry?
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:45 PM
    Perhaps looking at this as other than an exercise in comparative economic theorems might be in order.

    Were GM to continue it's current output until 20JAN09 it will result in 1.2million unsold vehicles. According to another author on this site. Lets use that figure.

    One solution might be the federal gov't purchase the excess vehicles as part of its annual ongoing fleet purchases with several conditions.

    First is to fire the management. Fire the Board. No golden parachutes. Gone the moment the documents are signed. No limo ride home.

    Second, offer all 1st tier UAW members one time only buy outs based on seniority.

    Third, stop all assembly of H2, pick-ups more than 1 ton and Escalade. All remaining SUV vehicles and pick-ups MUST be flex fuel or hybrid. Period.

    Consolidate remaining "brands". Keep Cadillac and Chevy. Lose Pontiac and maybe Olds.

    Re-tool closed factories to make additional rolling stock for commuter transportation. Subway cars, commuter rail cars and buses. These will be needed badly when gas goes higher than it recently was.

    Re-tool other closed factories to assemble wind towers, CNG systems for heavy trucks and other fuel saving technologies as the Pickens Plan suggests.

    As long as America manufactures nothing more than bogus financial instruments it will never be able to regain even a part of its former glory and will go the way of every two bit empire before it. Period.

    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:45 PM



    On Nov 17 04:31 PM longgee wrote:

    > James West, you are damn right and that's what I want to say. I can
    > say that GM/FORD cars is only can be sold in U.S but not the other
    > part of the world. Because of it's high labor cost compare to Japan
    > car maker ($78/hour VS 44/hour). The only reason why they still can
    > make car is the protection policy of the U.S. government for import
    > car.

    I'll post this a thousand times if I have to!

    GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the United States last year and holds a U.S. lead over Toyota of about 560,000 so far this year. Globally, GM in 2007 remained the world's largest automaker, selling 9,369,524 vehicles worldwide -- about 3,000 more than Toyota.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:46 PM
    James West is simply telling the truth in general about GM and the truth hurts. I applaud him in being brave enough to tell the truth.

    dpro0102, it sounds like you have or had some related employment with a US automaker or a supplier. That's where you show your bias. I do not and have not worked for any automaker. There are some solid GM products out there, but the few of them cannot make up for the bulk of the other products few care to buy. Why don't you speak of Hummer quality and reliability or lack of it, to be fair?

    Also, I used to buy Ford products and now own a Honda product. Why? Ford in the past seemed to have better reliability than Honda long ago, but Honda has since eclipsed Ford in quality and reliability, in general. The consumer is voting for what they want with their pocketbook. Let's respect that.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:49 PM



    re Dan S1 :

    I'll respect that IN GENERAL as you feel "IN GENERAL" trumps direct facts.

    GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the United States last year and holds a U.S. lead over Toyota of about 560,000 so far this year. Globally, GM in 2007 remained the world's largest automaker, selling 9,369,524 vehicles worldwide -- about 3,000 more than Toyota.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:50 PM
    Consumer Reports recently found that "Ford's reliability is now on par with good Japanese automakers." The independent J.D. Power Initial Quality Study scored Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, Ford, GMC, Mercury, Pontiac and Lincoln brands' overall quality as high or higher than that of Acura, Audi, BMW, Honda, Nissan, Scion, Volkswagen and Volvo.

    Powers rated the Chevrolet Malibu the highest-quality midsize sedan. Both the Malibu and Ford Fusion scored better than the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry.

    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:50 PM
    All of the Detroit Three build midsize sedans the Environmental Protection Agency rates at 29-33 miles per gallon on the highway. The most fuel-efficient Chevrolet Malibu gets 33 m.p.g. on the highway, 2 m.p.g. better than the best Honda Accord. The most fuel-efficient Ford Focus has the same highway fuel economy ratings as the most efficient Toyota Corolla. The most fuel-efficient Chevrolet Cobalt has the same city fuel economy and better highway fuel economy than the most efficient non-hybrid Honda Civic. A recent study by Edmunds.com found that the Chevrolet Aveo subcompact is the least expensive car to buy and operate.

    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:50 PM
    You missed the main point, to-wit: GM is doing well at everything they can control. What they can't control is the UAW demands. GM UAW employess earn an average (all in for health care, retirement etc) of $78 per hour. Average labor cost in the USA is $28 per hour. Other foreign auto companies are not unionized and pay far less in labor costs.

    What you are doing is repeating rumors without doing any research to find out the real cause of GM's trouble. No company can survive with that kind of labor cost differential.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:51 PM
    This is what Chapter 11 protection is properly used for - to protect a company from creditors as they restructure properly or fold. GM will not go away forever, but their business model is not sustainable. Their expenses are too high, revenues too low and products are not competitive with foreign competition. Management for far too long has been reactive vs. proactive and that gets you owned in the real world. I understand that the company is huge, employs lots of workers directly/indirectly and many pensioners - but it needs to restructure and the only way to do that so something is left is through Chapter 11.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:53 PM
    The VEBA agreement will take 50 billion of GM's hands and make it that much cheaper to do business in the US. The UAW is a shell of its former self. They are asking for a loan to bridge one year. You want to let them DIE and pay the consequences rather than help them float one year?

    3 million jobs lost? Better than loaning them a bridge to get to 2010?
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:55 PM
    I really liked the James West that was featured in the '60's series "The Wild, Wild West", but this one is just another in a series of boobs given a voice on Seeking Alpha. By the way, given the one-sided tone of every auto industry article here, it's really starting to look they have an agenda. How about ensuring some balance in the views that you provide, guys?
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 04:59 PM
    I couldn't make it past the first sentence without wanting to correct you. The number of enemies you make will number well beyond 300,000. Some estimates put it at 2-3 million.

    I personally can't provide any concrete data to support any number. However, I am a direct GM employee, and I can reassure you that the salary I receive spends an all-too-brief period of time in my hands, before it is reinvested into the local, state, and federal economy. Much of it goes into paying a mortgage. A large portion goes into local department stores, schools, restaurants, theaters, charities and banks.

    I have no idea how many jobs that money actually supports, but I have a feeling that when multiplied by the number of people who are currently employed by GM, it adds up to a number that is difficult for most to comprehend.

    So, yes you have made enemies of 300,000 people. But you have also made enemies of a much, much larger number. It is sad though, that many of them do not realize it yet, and many of them might indeed be naive enough to buy your "Let GM fail" philosophy.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 05:00 PM
    It sure looks like the envelope has been pushed as far as it can. All of those years where auto workers, at least those "serviced" by the UAW, were making huge money, W-A-Y too much money for the work they did, is coming home to roost. I can remember going into a GM plant as a vendor to GM and trying to do some training. It was time to move the bucket over to the next area (yes, I was teaching them how to clean more efficiently). Could I move the bucket? N-o-o-o-o. I had to wait for them to find a worker to move the bucket. Didn't want to take away any work from the UAW member! Did they want to learn how to clean more efficiently? Now, why would they want to be able to do more work in less time???? (that's a rhetorical question, folks!)

    So bottom line...unions have outlived their usefullness in this sector of manufacturing and have created this bubble that has burst. Would non-union auto plants be in the same pickle, all things (price of gas,, healthcare, etc.) being equal?
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 05:12 PM
    Jim, what management team worth it's salt doesn't plan for perpetual growth? Granted, contingency plans should be made as well, but for years the Big 3 have given American customers what they want which is why they've been around for over 100 years.

    Now market conditions take a drastic turn and you want to allow GM to fail, when a lot of pain and suffering can be avoided with a simple bridge loan?

    I say loan them the money, it's the least this country can do for what these companies have done for us over the years.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 05:17 PM
    Good paying jobs are the creation of communities giving big corporations, like GM tax abatements. In return GM pays it's workers well which boosts the communities economy. This works well for the hourly insurance worker, the real estate worker, the school worker and the hospital worker. The whole community prospers. GM pays more taxes back to the Governments of this country than all the foriegn automakers combined. Foriegn automakers send their profits not back into your communities, but back to Japan.

    By voting to close GM, you vote against your investment in your own community and to allow foriegn interests to entrench deeper in your back yards. I agree that GM needs to redo their business plan because there are lots of mixed signals and this is why congress is taking their time to sort all this out. But to destroy any community in this country as a lesson to unions and poor management would be like cutting off your nose to spite your face. I don't look at this so much a bailout, but as a loan to help out a nieghbor who's fallen to an unfreindly economy. Hell, we're pumping 10 billion into Iraq every month. Just helping a nieghbor out right? Let's help our own with 2 just months of Iraq compensation.
    But demand a business plan, that emphasizes that our communities come before retention bonuses, golden parachutes, foriegn investment and global aspirations. Demand union accountability - stem absenteeism, tighten work restrictions, better review family medical leave abuse, throw out appointed position slackers and eliminate job entitlement attitudes.
    In turn we should expect work coming back to our communities, which should energize our economy, which hopefully will return the big three to profitability, and in a year or two create a robust return for the taxpayer.
    If we don't start to come together soon, we will surely fall apart.
    We just have to put politics aside and demand accountability. Please
    save the U.S.A.. Don't ask for it, Don't argue about it. Demand it!

    Reply |Report abuse
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 05:19 PM
    bosun,

    EXACTLY! We as a country are throwing good money after bad by investing in things we don't need - like a fleet of a million SUV's that can only be sold at a loss. If we're going to nationalize an industry (a horrible situation), it should be mobilized to produce something we need, like renewable energy, mass transit, health care, national security, technology, or education. It better be SOMETHING that actually pays off in the future or we are doomed as an empire.

    Malinvestment is a pattern now. Look at the ROI on the bank bailouts/handouts. Look at the Iraq war. China on the other hand has enacted a massive stimulus plan that will leave them with world-class infrastructure, ports, and universities when it's all said and done. We, on the other hand, will have an oversupply of rapidly depreciating gas-guzzling vehicles for our trouble. Perhaps the govt. will find some place to park them out in the weather so they can rust away while we keep those assembly lines running, sort of, on taxpayer money.

    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 05:20 PM
    "GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the United States last year and holds a U.S. lead over Toyota of about 560,000 so far this year. Globally, GM in 2007 remained the world's largest automaker, selling 9,369,524 vehicles worldwide -- about 3,000 more than Toyota."

    And how much profit was turned on those sales? Oops.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 05:27 PM
    I am not a technical person in the sense that I don't follow all the political debates that are unfolding, and I only read my local paper, not the Wall Street Journal. I am a teacher, in high school, physics and chemistry so I am intelligent and I use alot of critical thinking every day.
    This deal with the bailout helping the auto dealers? My gut says let them go under. It sounds terrible to say as so many will lose jobs but we have to refrain from moving towards socialism. If the government steps in we then are edging more into that pit and ultimately the point of no return.
    Where do we draw the line? What companies does the government bail out and which does it allow to fall? The answer should be none and all. The United States has built its economy on credit and now as credit has all but dried up, we are faced with many industries not having any business at all. Many companies are looking at losses that are staggering and will not recover from this. I think it is just time to accept the end of the gravy train, it has gone off the tracks, and the derailment will leave many casualties but the end result will be reorganization after a certain amount of discomfort and strife. We are at war in a way with our own country and its foundational ideas. We have lost that war. All countries go through restructuring, we must also again, It is inevitable. A bailout will only stop the bleeding, it won't heal the mortal wound opened by a gunshot called bad mortgages.
    I say if a company cannot remain solvent, it must go under in the name of captitalism and all the United States of America stands for. We must not sway from our core principles of free enterprise and captialism.
    Sorry for typos, I am rushing around right now.
    BL
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 05:33 PM
    Dan S1 - I think that maybe you are of the opinion that you are unbiased.

    Is my factual statement of GM's recent and good product story a fly in your opinions' ointment? How about some facts in response to mine?

    I agree that the Hummer brand has quality lagging the industry average. I would also point out that the quality gap used to be 100's of problems per hundred vehicles. Now your talking a about 80 problems per hundred being stellar, and 150 problems being 'deplorable', 120 problems being the average. Not really a huge disparity. One of GM's problems was size - which is admittedly shrinking. As Toyota is growing - however - their quality reputation contunues to outshine their quality reality. Wonder how long it'll take factual reality to supplant public perception - but given our general Media frenzy regarding the uber-horrible American manufacturers - my guess is it may take longer than GM or Ford has.....

    My favorite argument from those that purchase Japanese vehicles is the investment angle - and the re-sale value.

    To them I can only ask one question - if your Honda is worth $1000 more than my Chevrolet after 3 years of ownership - how does that off-set the tens of thousands of dollars of lost equity in your pro
    On Nov 17 04:46 PM Dan S1 wrote:

    > James West is simply telling the truth in general about GM and the
    > truth hurts. I applaud him in being brave enough to tell the truth.
    >
    >
    > dpro0102, it sounds like you have or had some related employment
    > with a US automaker or a supplier. That's where you show your bias.
    > I do not and have not worked for any automaker. There are some solid
    > GM products out there, but the few of them cannot make up for the
    > bulk of the other products few care to buy. Why don't you speak of
    > Hummer quality and reliability or lack of it, to be fair?
    >
    > Also, I used to buy Ford products and now own a Honda product. Why?
    > Ford in the past seemed to have better reliability than Honda long
    > ago, but Honda has since eclipsed Ford in quality and reliability,
    > in general. The consumer is voting for what they want with their
    > pocketbook. Let's respect that.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 05:36 PM
    To those who say that because the big 3 sold a lot of cars, they therefore sell desirable cars, I would like to point out that many of them, especially the small cars, were sold at a loss for thousands less than their competitors. Zero percent subprime financing and $10k "rebates" will always persuade some people. At profitable prices, however, no big 3 vehicle can compete in the marketplace with a Toyota or Honda. If you disagree with that, perhaps you can explain why they chose to accept less money for their cars than they otherwise could. Charity?

    Also, I don't place much confidence in car magazine journalists who take a brand new car, drive it 150 miles, and declare it to be as good quality as another brand. Drive it 150,000 miles and tell me what you think. Quality means long-term durability and low-cost, reliable operation. Judging by resale values, big 3 cars don't tend to last that long before they have major problems. If you disagree with that, perhaps you can explain why a used-car economy comprised of tens of millions of people has priced these supposedly wonderful cars wrong and how that gap has persisted for decades. Are consumers just overlooking these bargains?

    Reality seems to conflict with the marketing slogans coming out of Detroit, and the excuses are becoming more and more convoluted.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 05:37 PM
    why would they cut the bigger vehicles thats were they make more money. Toyota makes a lot of its money from it's suvs, etc. GM axed olds around 2004. GM's biggest problem is the false belief out there that japanese cars are somehow better than GM. The 90's are over and gone with them is the cheap junk made by GM. They vehicles made by GM today are the best in the world in most classes (cost, efficiency, durability, longetivity, etc.).


    On Nov 17 04:45 PM bosun.j wrote:

    > Perhaps looking at this as other than an exercise in comparative
    > economic theorems might be in order.
    >
    > Were GM to continue it's current output until 20JAN09 it will result
    > in 1.2million unsold vehicles. According to another author on this
    > site. Lets use that figure.
    >
    > One solution might be the federal gov't purchase the excess vehicles
    > as part of its annual ongoing fleet purchases with several conditions.
    >
    >
    > First is to fire the management. Fire the Board. No golden parachutes.
    > Gone the moment the documents are signed. No limo ride home.
    >
    > Second, offer all 1st tier UAW members one time only buy outs based
    > on seniority.
    >
    > Third, stop all assembly of H2, pick-ups more than 1 ton and Escalade.
    > All remaining SUV vehicles and pick-ups MUST be flex fuel or hybrid.
    > Period.
    >
    > Consolidate remaining "brands". Keep Cadillac and Chevy. Lose Pontiac
    > and maybe Olds.
    >
    > Re-tool closed factories to make additional rolling stock for commuter
    > transportation. Subway cars, commuter rail cars and buses. These
    > will be needed badly when gas goes higher than it recently was.
    >
    >
    > Re-tool other closed factories to assemble wind towers, CNG systems
    > for heavy trucks and other fuel saving technologies as the Pickens
    > Plan suggests.
    >
    > As long as America manufactures nothing more than bogus financial
    > instruments it will never be able to regain even a part of its former
    > glory and will go the way of every two bit empire before it. Period.
    >
    >
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 05:37 PM
    Its no wonder school kids emerge from public schools unable to think critically based on this Brightlife's er, firm grasp of the situation.....


    On Nov 17 05:27 PM Brightlite wrote:

    > I am not a technical person in the sense that I don't follow all
    > the political debates that are unfolding, and I only read my local
    > paper, not the Wall Street Journal. I am a teacher, in high school,
    > physics and chemistry so I am intelligent and I use alot of critical
    > thinking every day.
    > This deal with the bailout helping the auto dealers? My gut says
    > let them go under. It sounds terrible to say as so many will lose
    > jobs but we have to refrain from moving towards socialism. If the
    > government steps in we then are edging more into that pit and ultimately
    > the point of no return.
    > Where do we draw the line? What companies does the government bail
    > out and which does it allow to fall? The answer should be none and
    > all. The United States has built its economy on credit and now as
    > credit has all but dried up, we are faced with many industries not
    > having any business at all. Many companies are looking at losses
    > that are staggering and will not recover from this. I think it is
    > just time to accept the end of the gravy train, it has gone off the
    > tracks, and the derailment will leave many casualties but the end
    > result will be reorganization after a certain amount of discomfort
    > and strife. We are at war in a way with our own country and its
    > foundational ideas. We have lost that war. All countries go through
    > restructuring, we must also again, It is inevitable. A bailout will
    > only stop the bleeding, it won't heal the mortal wound opened by
    > a gunshot called bad mortgages.
    > I say if a company cannot remain solvent, it must go under in the
    > name of captitalism and all the United States of America stands for.
    > We must not sway from our core principles of free enterprise and
    > captialism.
    > Sorry for typos, I am rushing around right now.
    > BL
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Nov 17 05:38 PM
    I like the authors article. It sounds like what I've been talking about for a long time! "Perpetual economic growth is impossible," and cheap debt meant we already spent tomorrow's unearned money and consumers are already tapped out.

    I think one thing needs to be made clear. I love GM. I think the Big 3 have had a lot of problems, but they have largely cleared up their quality problems, though very few people give them that credit. Even Toyota and Honda are going to sell less cars, because this probl