Well, it looks like the globalization of the automotive industry driven by all the free trade ballyhoo of decades past could very well come full
circle to bite the North American industry right on the gluteus maximus.
The commission believes that subsidies on the scale of the $25bn-$50bn (£16bn-£32bn) sought by the US's big three - General Motors, Ford and
Chrysler - are incompatible with World Trade Organisation rules and would provoke official complaints to the Geneva-based body
If deemed subsidies by the WTO, it would lead to tarrifs, which would lead to the closing of markets outside of the US for automobiles.
If they get the dough and they stand to lose market share as the tariffs will make the product uncompetetive, thus they won't be able to sell what
you produce.
Don't get the dough, and you can't produce enough stuff to sell.
Which one is better . . .
Link to story
|
reply to post by GoalPoster
I hate to say it but they need to fail. There is a reason that they are in this situation and giving them more money won't fix the problem. Then
again, the same could be said of most of the companies that are being bailed out.
|
I would have much rather put the big banks out of business than the auto industry
Yes, throwing money rarely fixes a problem of bad management, but damn, thats a LOT of autoworkers out of jobs.
Blue collar, hard working stiffs like the rest of us. Letting the auto makers fail, fails...
|
reply to post by midnightbrigade
I know, it is a crappy situation. How can you reward the big three for their failure by throwing taxpayer money at them though? They have been
outdone by the foreign automakers for a long time now, yet they haven't been able to make the changes to stay alive. Throwing money at them won't
do anything but limp them along a few more months.
If I really believed that the money could save the companies, specifically the employees, then I would be all for it. I just think that it would only
go to line the pockets of the execs while they watch the companies crumble.
|
I was under the impression that their financial crisis stems from the 'lending' activities into which they migrated once the profit of such a move
was identified. So if there is a failure it will be of those branches, not the actual production arm itself.
Is this incorrect?
|
an auto sector bailout, of all those Michigan factories
could potentially cause the 'displacement' of other auto workers in other states like SC, Ala, Tenn and the several other states
which manufacture & assemble foreign autos here in the USA...
are we then obliged to bailout these auto workers, who make foreign products & brand names for less wages and benefits than the dinosaur corps known
as the 'Big 3' ?
the Toyotas and other autos made in American plants by American workers, have led the way in MPG efficiencies and have a longer service life and
retain better value than the Big-3 product lines for decades.
imho,
let the big-3 retool for rapid transit coaches, AmTracks & bullet-trains and other projects...As they have failed with the personal auto,
In addition, the plants which cannot be retrofitted for the new mission should be parceled out to the foreign brand auto producers, with our blessings
& good will
thanks
[edit on 2-12-2008 by St Udio]
|
I get what everyone is saying, my only problem is that I wouldn't want the 20,000 workers at these plants to loose their livelyhood simply because of
poor management. It's not the blue collars fault that these places are crapping out. I think a bail out should be given. On the condition that the
old CEO's and most of the management be booted out.
And Karl, LMAO at your new Avatar...A drug dealing killer in a Santa had just makes me crack up! 
|
