Big 3 auto bailout coverage

And that's bad because? :shady:

It puts a huge company in exactly the position it finds itself in now, and in such a manner that it's failure will have dramatic consequences across the global economy.

There is no logic, only greed, behind unskilled labor making specialist pay.
 
we survived one depression we can survive another. besides it's you fucktards in the usa at large asking for SUVS that drove us into this mess.

I would attribute that more to an arrogance of the big 3 trying to dictate what they feel we should buy vs. the reality of what the consumer wants...toyota and honda didn't get where they are by accident
 
I would attribute that more to an arrogance of the big 3 trying to dictate what they feel we should buy vs. the reality of what the consumer wants...toyota and honda didn't get where they are by accident
the SUV debacle is the consumer's as well as the producer's fault. you can't say the consumer was force fed a diet of suv's when there were other models available. on the other hand suv's were definitely heavily promoted because profit margins are larger for them.

there's an excellent article on the birth of the suv here: http://gladwell.com/2004/2004_01_12_a_suv.html

In the summer of 1996, the Ford Motor Company began building the Expedition, its new, full-sized S.U.V., at the Michigan Truck Plant, in the Detroit suburb of Wayne. The Expedition was essentially the F-150 pickup truck with an extra set of doors and two more rows of seats—and the fact that it was a truck was critical. Cars have to meet stringent fuel-efficiency regulations. Trucks don't. The handling and suspension and braking of cars have to be built to the demanding standards of drivers and passengers. Trucks only have to handle like, well, trucks. Cars are built with what is called unit-body construction. To be light enough to meet fuel standards and safe enough to meet safety standards, they have expensive and elaborately engineered steel skeletons, with built-in crumple zones to absorb the impact of a crash. Making a truck is a lot more rudimentary. You build a rectangular steel frame. The engine gets bolted to the front. The seats get bolted to the middle. The body gets lowered over the top. The result is heavy and rigid and not particularly safe. But it's an awfully inexpensive way to build an automobile. Ford had planned to sell the Expedition for thirty-six thousand dollars, and its best estimate was that it could build one for twenty-four thousand—which, in the automotive industry, is a terrifically high profit margin. Sales, the company predicted, weren't going to be huge. After all, how many Americans could reasonably be expected to pay a twelve-thousand-dollar premium for what was essentially a dressed-up truck? But Ford executives decided that the Expedition would be a highly profitable niche product. They were half right. The "highly profitable" part turned out to be true. Yet, almost from the moment Ford's big new S.U.V.s rolled off the assembly line in Wayne, there was nothing "niche" about the Expedition.
 
I would attribute that more to an arrogance of the big 3 trying to dictate what they feel we should buy vs. the reality of what the consumer wants...toyota and honda didn't get where they are by accident

toyota and honda simply built up on the backs of millions of ricer racers.
 
It puts a huge company in exactly the position it finds itself in now, and in such a manner that it's failure will have dramatic consequences across the global economy.

There is no logic, only greed, behind unskilled labor making specialist pay.

The failure of the company is not due to the salaries of the workers, but due to the (highly educated) idiots at the top who didn't bother to be ready for the inevitable.