So you believe there was no danger of millions of jobs being loss if the auto industry collapsed? If you believe that than you have not a clue of the many of business that survive because of the auto industry. Also, a loan and bailout are two different things, I know repubs like to use the word bailout but unlike the money given to the banks the car companies are paying back their LOANS.

Rodney, you assume that the money spent to bailout the auto's couldn't have been spent somewhere else to save other jobs. People who live in other parts of the country, that don't have a bunch of union auto jobs, think that money could have been spent on industries that benefit them.

Yes Ron, I agree, but anyone who makes a statement by saying Barry this and Barry that is just not going to see your point of view.

Ron,

GM and Chrysler did fail and fall into bankruptcy, Ford did not.

Ford made the right decisions in time and did not ignore the economic conditions. This put them in position to make it through the economic cliff we all were facing.

GM and Chrysler ignored the facts and hoped all would be right. When they finally accepted the reality of the situation it was too late, they both approached Ford for partnerships to save themselves. Now money was given to them by the previous administration to get through a short period to prepare for bankruptcy. The current president decided to help the unsecured (UAW) over the secured investors breaking all contract laws and then took them into bankruptcy.

They demonized these secured investors and called them "Fat Cats". In reality it was real people and pension plans who thought their investment was "Secure". They lost everything and the UAW avoided losses of their unsecured investments.

In summary our president did not save the auto industry. GM and Chrysler both failed and went bankrupt. Ford did it the right way in the same industry, same time period and economic conditions. The administration just rewarded bad corporate behavior for political gain with our tax dollars.

All organizations can learn something from Ford on how to look ahead and make changes to avoid failure down the road. A good study for our public sector, they are all facing the cliff.

I'm sorry Daryl, but A LOT of Ford being able to weather the storm was luck. They went into the tank a couple years earlier than the rest when you could get a mortgage by just breathing. They where able to build cash by mortgaging their assets. GM and Chrysler couldn't. I doubt the folks at Ford had the crystal ball that predicted the real estate crash.
If you want to see great management, take a look at Oakland County, where they identified the retirement benefits being paid to county employees where unsustainable over a decade ago and started making changes before it was too late.

Daryl, Great post.
Rick,
Luck? I call it proper management at the top. Note the bailout/bankruptcy candidates don't have the same guy at the top, Ford does.
Do you think Mulaly's success at Boeing was "luck" as well?

Ok...so call it luck... So be it.
I'll take Ford's "luck" rather than feed those that can't stand on their own feet who need our tax dollars...
And, it's going to happen again. GM is already making the same mistakes...and Chrysler, although doing better, is not out of the woods either.
They enjoyed a good run while Japan was down and out because of HUGE disasters. Note, Japan is inching back up.

BTW, I own and love a Dodge RAM, I'm not a foreign car advocate or baiter.
I'm a realist who looks at the whole picture instead of just looking at just the colors of the rainbow that suit my cause, on a given day.

Rick,

If you understand the whole story you will know that Ford did see the economic cliff coming, had plenty of discussions with the Feds about it and decided to plan for the upcoming event. This was not luck, it was forward planning and great management. This is documented, but lost in the spin.

On the other hand GM and Chrysler made fun of Ford as they were preparing for the storm and ignored the signs of the upcoming failure. They even had a dialog with Ford asking them what they were doing and why, but ignored the facts leading to the failure.

The government rewarded bad behavior by GM and Chrysler that lead to their failure. This is a very poor precedence and we see it in many other areas where the government gets in the way of the free market.

I agree with you about Oakland County taking action before the pending storm just like Ford did. I wish all of our government entities would accept the coming storm and prepare, very few are and a majority is not.

Can you feel the heat before the explosion?

I am not in any way attempting to defend mismanagement at GM or Chrysler, or defend the way the bailout was handled, which I think will damage the ability of companies to sell bonds for years to come. (Why buy a bond when according to Peters you have less security then an unsecured union member.)

What I am saying is Ford had the good fortune (luck it you will) to have to face the facts a bit earlier then the others, which lead to the hiring of Mulaly and the mortgaging of everything including the oval to raise cash. The others didn't have the immediate cash flow issue and didn't need to immediately raise such a credit line.

Rick,

I see your point and some of that is part of the dynamic, others say “one makes their own luck.” However, GM & Chrysler had the same information Ford did at the crucial time. Ford took action and made some very difficult decisions as a pre emptive strike. GM & Chrysler hoped things would return and missed the opportunity to save themselves. They all had the same data and acted differently, this is on the management team of the company.

We should be giving credit to Ford and the entire management team; they are the shining example that with hard work, smart decisions and sacrifice you can overcome any obstacle on your own.

Politically GM & Chrysler are being used for saving the auto industry. When I look at these 2 very different paths I do not think the government method saved the auto industry, in fact I believe it let them off the hook and the bad behavior will return.

GM stock price tells the story about our return on investment with taxpayer dollars, it will not happen.

Chrysler was given to a foreign auto manufacturer who is not recognized as a stellar company in Europe. This was with our taxpayer dollars. If you notice in the political spin and use they only mention GM when they say they saved the industry. I dislike politics on any side, it distorts the facts with spin.

The auto industry in Detroit/Michigan has failed because union compensation is too high, and the workers can't be fired for poor work. There are auto plants in other parts of the US that are successful. There are auto plants all over the world that are successful. They just don't pay $72 an hour to put on lug nuts.

You are so right!! My husband who works at a small shop almost lost his job, The trickle down effect to this state would have been devastating.

Daryl Patrishkoff, is wrong again... Ford did except a lot of government money to stay afloat. Ford, BMW, Toyota Took Government Money In the depths of the financial collapse, the U.S. Federal Reserve pumped $3.3 trillion into keeping credit moving through the economy. It eventually lent $57.9 billion to the auto industry — including $26.8 billion to Ford, Toyota and BMW. http://jalopnik.com/5704575/ford-bmw-toyota-took-secret-government-money

Read more Daryl comments at:
http://rochester.patch.com/articles/was-the-automotive-industry-saved

If we had followed Daryl's advice millions of jobs would have been lost in the Great Lakes region.

Scot,

The facts are, Ford, like all auto companies at that time had a financial arm that was a separate entity from the manufacturing arm. They had to follow financial institutional law because they were a financial institution.

When the banks went down the government made all financial entities take money to hide which bank was really failing so there would be run on that bank. All bank entities had to take the money, whether they needed it or not, this included the financial arms of all of the auto industry.

Now let's look back and see the outcome, GMAC went bankrupt and under federal help started up again and is now financing their vehicles under a different entity. The reason GMAC went bankrupt is because they aggressively went into the mortgage business with risky loans.

Ford financial did not go into the risky housing mortgage market and was able to weather the storm.

As you say, “If we had followed Daryl's advice millions of jobs would have been lost in the Great Lakes region.” Sounds like a twisted truth scare tactic right out of the Obama campaign.

The fact is GM and Chrysler did go bankrupt and normal proceedings happen, except for unsecured investors being put in front of secured investors. The outcome was the same. The bailout money was given to GM and Chrysler by the previous administration to give them time to organize for bankruptcy.

Ford did not; this was done in the same time frame, same economic conditions and same industry.

Daryl,
You continue to confuse me; have you flip-flopped your position on this issue -- your letter in the Rochester Patch supported -- backup -- Mitt Romney's position which would have caused millions of jobs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=3
http://rochester.patch.com/articles/was-the-automotive-industry-saved

Well said, of course owning half the company may not be what they once thought it was or was going to be.

You don't have clue what you are talking about and obviously not a member of a union. What you fail to realize is your salary and many of the benefits you enjoy at your place of employment are a direct result of unions. The car companies make billions of dollars while employing a union workforce. The destruction of unions have nothing to do with economics, it has to do corporate greed as well as political gains by republicans. Unions are the last line of defense against unfair labor practices, work environments, and fair wages. It a shame that people want to blame workers because they want to have a voice in what happens to them in their workplace.

Rodney, if it was the 1930's...I'd agree with you 100%. Unions built the middle class.
They are also destroying it by the very greed you mentioned ...but blamed it on corporate.
Unions are not the last line of defense. They are the first in line for the handout and bailout. We have laws because of unions, you are right.
So...we have laws, tell me why we need unions again.

Let me propose this to you. Give a person the choice of joining the union when they start a job. If you opt out, you get the same pay/package, you just have to invest in your own retirement and medical. Instead of what the union "collectively bargained in their favor (of course they'll say it's in your favor).
You control your retirement and benefits.

You care to place a bet on how well that works for your unions?

Rodney... I fully agree with DJG...The reason for "Union existence" has been surpassed by today's work environment controls via MI OSHA and other laws on the books..I am retired from one of the Big Three companies and was employed in Plant Management position.. I have seen the "UAW" in action on the "plant floor" level..I only have one thing to say, they have no logic in their demands, protected the rebel-rousers , were constantly involved in power plays, walked into meetings unannounced, saw grievances in almost everything and the list goes on..
In hindsight, Management should have reacted in a much stronger NO fashion during these so called bully negotiations.I have lived it first hand...
Plants are so highly automated and full with fail safe systems that assembly line works is just a low skill job.. I make exception for the real "skilled trades" who need to maintain and troubleshoot the highly sophisticated machinery..

Anyway, we are where we are and I am glad to see that Ford saw the train wreck ahead of time and reacted accordingly.. I know GM workers who are leaving around 08:30 am and be back home at 02:00pm.. salaried as well as hourly employees..This second wreck is coming..

Enough said..

@Dave. Already starting to happen. Now that Japan is back on it's feet and in full force...their making their comback to where they were before, and D3 are slipping...

The tides are shifting once again.

You are incorrect about unions taking money from its members. That is a huge misconception, all money given by union members for political purposes is completely voluntary. Unions give political donations to whomever supports union causes. Do workers have any say so when CEOS give money, on behalf companies, to politicians that are hostile to workers rights? When I stated unions are responsible for wages and workplace perks, I was stating that even companies without unions, benefit from the gains unions have made in union workplaces.

Rodney...
Do you pay union dues? Do you pay into an acuity and/or healthcare? Do you realize how that money is used and invested?
The profits realized from these are used for the lobbying/votes.

If you think otherwise, you've truly drank too much Koolaide, which...is exactly what they want.

Do you think that money taken out of your check just sits under a big mattress...ready for you to use when you're ready?
It is invested and rolled over...please tell me you realize this.

Couldn't agree with u more House Rich. Chumps like Dingell and Bluto O'Reilly take there money for big promises made to the unions in general, but really the only ones getting fat are the union officials.

Agree completely. Side note, have seen too many friends/relatives taking advantage of GM and Chrysler, working OT but not working, and union protects them!

You know a commentor works at Democrat Party Headquarters when they mention the Koch brothers. Whose worse, the Kochs or George Soros?

Really, Christopher? When Joseph wrote "Unions are not perfect, CEOs and disfunctional rich family concerns such as the Kochs are not, either.", which merely stated a fact, you recoil at the mention of Kochs?

Well, to answer your question, consider the obscene spending of the Kochs:

Koch Network Alone To Spend More To Defeat Obama In 2012 Than McCain Raised In All Of 2008 | Republic Report - http://www.republicreport.org/2012/koch-mccain-obama/

David Koch Admits His Goal Is To Weaken Labor Rights, 'Spend More' In Elections | Republic Report - http://www.republicreport.org/2012/david-koch-labor-unions/

Now, can you find any analog of George Soros' campaign financing? http://instantrimshot.com/classic/?sound=crickets

Darryl,

Thanks for the response directly from Democrat Party Headquarters. Either you don't know that there are dozens of ways to direct money into the political process without it going on record, or you do and are lying. I won't waste my time, you're a zealot, as I said before who see's successful American businessmen who oppose your cause as evil, but a successful Greek businessman who supports your cause as an angel. Well done.

The shame of America is that the "power brokers" like The Koch's and Soros use their money and influence to obfuscate the FACTS of any issue, using the citizens of the US to so their dirty work. These factions have succeeded in dividing our nation along ideological lines for their own gain. A myopic, uniformed electorate is the best friend of power and greed.

Agreed, and this is one of the most interesting elements of the bailout and its impact on politics. If Obama had not bailed them out, would the unions have voted Republican? Hardly. The Republicans haven't won Michigan in years, notice the national media never speaks of us because we go Democrat no matter what, and our electoral votes keep shrinking.

Rodney, I fully understand that unions are not solely to blame.
In the case of GM and Chrysler, both CEOs were gone at the time of or shortly thereafter of the bankruptcy.

But you can't build a successful business on a bad foundation. The UAW is a foundation of sand. Simply put.

CEO wages have grown. In Mulally's case, deservedly so. In others..not so sure.
You realize how many hand picked Wall Street "Fat Cats" Obama has as cabinet or advisor positions? These are the very fat cats he said he'd take on. I guess that means he's take them on as employees. After the TARP bailouts, you realize Wall Street Compensation is at an all time high. That is 100% under Obama's watch.

You never answered my question in the post above. If you feel your union is so great, would you give a new employee a choice of not joining a union and getting the same pay as a union employee, the difference being they are responsible for their retirement investments and health care?

DJG: Yes, give the employee the CHOICE if he/she wants to be in the union. Then, we will see how great the unions are!

The problem with the CEO compensation argument is that years ago the communists (unions, etc.) complained about the same thing, so almost all of the public companies tied CEO compensation to share price. So, if the company did well, and all of its shareholders (union pensions, employee 401k's) did well, the CEO got paid.
Because most CEO's aren't dumb, they managed to a higher share price and got paid even more than before.

Great post Hartland HS Parent, Daryl P. has given us the facts straight up. A shorter way of stating what he said is this : Mr. Obama screwed the shareholders and paid off the unions.

As an individual , all I can do to protest is to not buy a GM or Chrysler product moving forward which is what I will do. I have purchased or leased 11 GM products since 1994. I will go with Ford or maybe even look at VW moving forward. Bye bye GM !

Basically nothing will happen ----except the corporate name will be Toyota, Honda,or some other efficient entity. The market for vehicles will still be there ----instead of GM Chevrolet Imalas they will be known as Honda Impalas.

The workers will still have jobs to fill the market demands, the dealers will just change the name on their dealerships, and auto suppliers will still be making the same parts.

The executives will move into politics?

And Peter is right on the money, GM is already on track to go bankrupt again in the next two years, sales are down, profits are down, they are still deeply in debt to the taxpayers. I give them two years max and you will see them bankrupt again, only this time they will be forced to it the legal way without Obama Stash propping them up for the sake of UAW ownership. ALL contracts will be renegotiated to be inline with the market values. That probably means the UAW will take a very deep haircut as they should have the first time around. None of what I said is politics, its observation of the truth, the only politics involved is the politics that our very Govt and the Unions have already inserted into the equation. GM will ultimately probably end up being a majority Chinese Communist Party owned institution as GM already is producing 70% of its vehicles in China now anyway. GM has sold its soul to Communist China years ago.

The democrats from MI know, and have known for some time, who greases their pockets. If there's one thing Obama did well in MI, it's buy the UAW vote and the vote of many other unions as well.

Great post Angie, could not agree more !

And the Republicans and big business are not in each other's pockets? The billions of tax breaks given to the oil companies (who are making billions of dollars in profits), have nothing to do with a flow of money from the oil companies to the Republican party?

Destruction of the military? Funny. You do know that we spend 711 billion per year on defense? If that number doesn't mean much to you, that is 41% of the entire planet's defense spending. Seven times that of China and ten times that of Russia. In what alternate reality does that make any sense at all? And military spending under Obama is higher than it was under Bush.

Precisely what freedoms have we lost in the last 4 years? I'm not sure what country you are living in! The freedom not to go bankrupt from an unexpected health crisis? I'm celebrating that one, and so should everyone.

Angie: You are correct. And, anyone who supports Obamacare does not realize the freedoms they are giving up. Do not know WHY anyone would want the government to be in control of their health care, have all details on some database, make the choice whether they get an operation or a pill.

President George W Bush put this country in the hole and then expected the next president to clean up his mess. There is no loss of freedom, small business went to the crapper during the Bush years, we the taxpayers bailed out the banks and they are not paying us back, and its funny that Mitt Romney praised the Israel health care system- a system that is univeral health care - the same health care that the republicans want to abolish in this country!!

Concerned Parent: Just addressing your first sentence below. When you want to complain about breaks for oil companies keep this in mind: Democrats ruled congress for 50 years. Nothing passed without the Democrats approval, including the oil breaks, at least half of which were sponsored by a Democrat.

Another Myth - Corporate Tax Breaks : Most of these are for investment in capital goods or equipment, like buildings and machines, which create more jobs. Some are from states and municipalities attempting to keep or get large employers. Michigan has done this for years to keep auto jobs here, and the breaks benefit the worker as much, if not more than the executive. Here's a hypothetical.

If they move an auto plant to Alabama, they will certainly have workers who can run the plant. We've automated the skill out of 90% of the jobs. But they may not have the senior leadership, so the plant manager and his/her team move to Alabama and 2,000 union employee's in Detroit get laid off.

So be careful when you spew hate on corporate tax breaks.

"Who is scary are those who, for THEIR OWN BENEFIT, see no problem whatsoever trashing EXISTING LAW as long as they are the beneficiary's of the judicial malfeasance."

Thomas and Scalia need to be removed from office.

You are correct! Those who understand the rule of law need to start being more vocal.

in your head along with the other voices..

What do you call the bailout of the banks!!!

If not for the president's saving the American auto industry, we'd be facing 20% unemployment now, and probably bread lines. How narrow-minded can you get?

QUESTIONER: Are you happy seeing your suggestion, this new Buffett Rule, becoming more of a basis of a political battle that really has turned into class warfare?

BUFFETT: Actually, there’s been class warfare going on for the last 20 years, and my class has won. We’re the ones that have gotten our tax rates reduced dramatically.

If you look at the 400 highest taxpayers in the United States in 1992, the first year for figures, they averaged about $40 million of [income] per person. In the most recent year, they were $227 million per person — five for one. During that period, their taxes went down from 29 percent to 21 percent of income. So, if there’s class warfare, the rich class has won.

Believe it.

Well formulated view....thanks for sharing...

Really? You take advantage of Medicare...(and military protection, and maybe even Social Security).....SOCIALIST!!!

That's the free market, baby! Why is the free market OK for everything else but the oil companies? If they can't survive without government subsidies, they should do something else! (actually this isn't my real viewpoint, but it reveals the cognitive dissonance in yours).

I am sure you are not the only person who saw the bias in the way the question was framed.

Have you abandoned the banks and mortgage companies that blew a hole in the American economy? Just wondering. Also wondering where you get this "Bush defied the autos" cr... er, stuff? Weird.

Lee, you are wrong. Stop repeating this proven lie. The anti-redlining Community Reinvestment Act was NOT the cause of the banking failures, and since the facts are well documented but not widely known, people still lie about the CRA. You should consider stopping yourself.

Yes, the credit bubble driven primarily by non-bank lenders not covered by the CRA.

No, the housing boom & bust was not in the areas covered by thew CRA.

Yes, the housing boom global in nature, with the US bubble less than many other nations.

Proof?

What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral - The Washington Post - http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/what-caused-the-financial-crisis-the-big-lie-goes-viral/2011/10/31/gIQAXlSOqM_story.html

There are other sources:

2007–2012 global financial crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007%E2%80%932012_global_financial_crisis

Private Wall Street Companies Caused The Financial Crisis — Not Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Or The Community Reinvestment Act | Political Correction - http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/201110140001

Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis | McClatchy - http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/10/12/53802/private-sector-loans-not-fannie.html

So, please, stop lying about it.

Hilarious. If the president is indeed a 'socialist' in the way that you intend that term, he is probably the least effective in history. For a 'socialist' he's done a pretty great job at encouraging private business. I believe the Dow was at 8,000 or so when he took office. Now it's at 13,000. Corporate profits are at all all time high. Tax rates at an all time low. Private business is clearly flourishing! In any kind of 'socialism' one might expect the public sector to be doing better, but no.. public sector jobs have decreased.

In any case. I have to wonder if people who cry 'socialism' have any idea what this actually means. Socialism does not equate to Soviet-era communism. I for one, would welcome a slide toward Finnish or Danish or Norwegian socialism! High GDP, great education and health systems, excellent standards of living, and possibly more 'freedom' and democracy that you or I experience in the USA. Bring it on!

@ ConcernedParent...suggest you do it.. I got motivated to immigrate to the USA for exact the opposite reasons...Getting taxed to 50 plus percent, paying VAT on everything ( restaurants 16%, a new car or boat 25%, and the list goes on) was what I grew up with until I started coming to the USA ..What an eye opener...Now I am a proud US citizen who lived in both continents and rest assured, I know the difference...

@Frank D, I also am an immigrant from Europe. I received the best college education in the world for free. I graduated with no college loans. I received the best medical care in the world for free. Socialized medicine took care of my mother as she received a cancer diagnosis, through 4 years of treatment, long ICU stays, surgery and finally in-home hospice care. A nurse came to her home every day, she was able to have hospital equipment installed, and my working class parents did not have to fear that they would be bankrupt by her medical bills.

I love this country. I'm proud to be an American and I choose to live here for many reasons. But I saw the benefit of those high European tax rates, and was happy to pay them.

you should cool it on the wikipedia sources for your info and pull back on the condescension towards anyone who has a different opinion...

Lee, you are STILL wrong. Stop repeating this proven lie. The anti-redlining Community Reinvestment Act was NOT the cause of the banking failures. Offering an argument based on an article written in 2008 before the full event occurred is intellectually dishonest. All you have proven is that you can cut and paste links.

Again, yes, the credit bubble driven primarily by non-bank lenders not covered by the CRA. No, the housing boom & bust was not in the areas covered by thew CRA. Yes, the housing boom was global in nature, with the US bubble less than many other nations.

Proof? Glean it from:

>Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crisis_Inquiry_Commission
-or- the 663 page FCIC report: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-FCIC/pdf/GPO-FCIC.pdf
>2007-2012 global financial crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007%E2%80%932012_global_financial_crisis
>Private Wall Street Companies Caused The Financial Crisis, Not Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Or The Community Reinvestment Act: http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/201110140001
>Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/10/12/53802/private-sector-loans-not-fannie.html

Repeating your lies don't make them true.
People are getting wise to your act - The Big Lie goes viral: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/what-caused-the-financial-crisis-the-big-lie-goes-viral/2011/10/31/gIQAXlSOqM_story.html

I didn't realize that holding differing opinions in this great country makes you lose your citizenship? Your views are an insult to the huddled masses, and all those who came here from all over the world and brought with them their varied traditions and religions, seeking to be welcomed as a part of this diverse republic.

They weren't all loans. Part was taking an ownership position in the company via stock.

Linda, if it doesn't resonate in votes in Michigan it will prove correct an old Mark Twain comment to the effect that "If you feed a starving dog, he won't bite you. That is the difference between people and animals".

I'm certainly not pissed off that Bin Laden is dead, and I thank the military for doing so. Of course Obama will completely destroy their budget shortly, showing his thanks and respect for making him look good.

Is a person in a persistant vegatative state really alive? If the government weren't pumping it's lungs with taxpayer dollars, would GM exist? We told you 30 years ago this couldn't last forever and you did nothing. Now there's about 75% less of you and no reason to think there will ever be more.