Obama hopes for `leaner, meaner' GM and Chrysler

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama says General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC must emerge from their restructuring as "leaner, meaner" companies and that a substantial market awaits them if they make the right decisions.

Obama said in an interview broadcast Saturday on C-SPAN that the beleaguered automakers should aim to have product lines that appeal to consumers — and that means fuel efficient and high-performance vehicles that Americans hunger for.

He defended government intervention in the industry, saying the administration could not let either company simply dissolve.

"Our auto industry is the foundation for economies all across the Midwest," Obama said, "and ultimately, for the country as a whole. And had we allowed GM or Chrysler simply to liquidate that would have been a huge anti-stimulus on the economy as a whole, and could have dragged us even deeper into recession or even depression."

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090523/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_auto_industry

i had one UAW job when i was 24, and the union was a lot better than the shitty job. (not an auto related job.)

i dont think we will see the multinationals cutting back on anything but employees and wages.

I think we got the leaner part too.

not to mention reliable.

"smarter and greener." Almost everyone here in DU is in that crowd, and I expect a large chunk of Ann Arbor residents would be as well (LSA'77).

However, I think that there is very large group of drivers who would like "smarter and greener" so long as their driving experience doesn't change all that much. I think that this goes for Honda and Toyota drivers as well as GM and Chrysler drivers.

I also think that either gasoline prices must go up (which may happen if the dollar continues to crater even though world demand does not) or U.S. drivers must pinch pennies in a way not known since the '30s (which may very well be happening).

I just don't see that the transformation of U.S. transportation is going to be all that easy. Maybe it's because I was a driver during the '70s and early '80s that I see tremendous potential to backslide from public transit and high mpg vehicles.

I just hope that I'm wrong this time.

I, too, was around during the 70's and the emphasis on fuel efficiency.

I have watched as cars got larger and larger. I am one of the few people in my area driving a fairly small car. When I go out to find my parked car, I have trouble finding it because of all of the large SUVs parked in the lot.

I don't think that most people want small, efficient cars. Most of the vehicles in my area are SUVs, pickup trucks or large sedans. Even "imported" cars are much larger than they used to be.

If gas goes up to $4.00/gal and stays there, then I think we will see a change in demand.

It is odd, to me, that I have heard NO calls for returning to the 55mpg speed limit. That would reduce fuel costs and fuel demand. Yet, no one is calling for that.

I have heard that the reason for the failure of domestic car makers is that they didn't produce economical vehicles. I don't think that is the whole story. I think they produced exactly what the public wanted. The fact is that cars, of any kind, are just not selling at this time. I don't think that would change even if cars were available with high mpg. The economy stinks. Other than necessity items, not much is selling.

The fact is that people like large, roomy, powerful cars. One concern I have about the new CAFE standards the President is calling for is that people will just opt for the SUVs, which are considered light trucks at a much less stringent MPG requirement.

I hope Americans start changing their attitudes about fuel efficiency/emissions.

then he would make it so gas is always $4 or more. A gas tax or a carbon tax are not politically convenient things to pass.

I have followed several threads where people complained that more efficient cars are available in other parts of the world. Part of the cause for that is that gas is simply cheaper here than in those countries. I think tax is the reason for the disparity.

The truth is that our fuel tax is too low now, as it is. We are facing a crisis in this country with roads which are in poor shape because of the shortage of money to repair them with. My car is out of alignment because of all of the pot holes in all of my area roads. There are plenty of pot holes, even on the interstate.

Yes, for a variety of reasons, fuel tax should be increased. That would be very unpopular.

Clinton, who had his successes, helped ensure he wasn't perfect by removing the 55MPH limit. Though more people remember him for playing with cigars on Monica...

I am in agony at the thought of China getting the brand. No way I want to buy a Chinese-made car.

:thumbsup:

Relatives I know of, when told the (unsubstantiated to date) rumor that China would be doing the production, said the President would NOT allow such a thing. Which makes sense...

I'm surprised Chinese companies didn't seem more eager to buy US brands. Chinese vehicles will be here soon and it seems like it would be easier to sell them as Saturns than as a new Chinese brand. I guess we'll know more about the fate of Saturn soon. GM will be in bankruptcy by Friday and more of their plans will probably become public knowledge.

our 1996 Saturn is a gem, the 2001 Chevy Blazer is the most expensive vehicle I have ever owned and I'm not even talking about the price I paid for it. Thousands of dollars in repairs. Now in the shop again because some computer/electrical part went bad and the part alone costs $400. And the freaking dealership told us we could only bring it in on Sat (we called Thurs), then told us they won't be able to have it fixed until Tuesday. The service guy says "We're the only dealership in the area open today, and we are closed Sunday and Monday."

This is a company who is struggling to remain relevant and umm, in business?

I'm never buying a GM product ever again.

big SUVs and bir trucks are what
kept GM (and Chysler) alive for as long
as it did.

I'm sure they can make them more energy-efficient though. You can't run a farm without a pickup to haul feed in. Four-wheel drive is pretty helpful when you live five miles down a gravel road that doesn't get plowed for several days after a snowstorm.

By autumn things will be more clear; I **am** looking forward to the Chevy Volt, but things are too unstable.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. President Barack Obama said in an interview released on Saturday he was confident General Motors would thrive after restructuring, but he made no mention whether the ailing automaker might have to enter bankruptcy to complete reorganization.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090523/pl_nm/us_autos_gm_obama

.
.
.

why not?

..for awhile they will, the government will make sure they do, but I honestly don't think most American's want green cars if it at all impacts on their driving experience. Staring out into my neighborhood I hardly see a single economically, environmentally friendly vehicle at all. There are a few Prius's and Hybrid Camry's, but they are parked next in the driveway next to SUV's and trucks (almost all foreign).

To be honest, I had GM cars and they were always in the shop. Bought Honda's (mostly Civic's) after I gave up on American cars and they never were in the shop. Maybe the US cars are better now, but even if they are the styles just aren't as appealing to many.

I really don't think the government has a clue what people want and the more influence it has on GM and Chrysler the less likely these companies are to produce anything that sells well.

Only way this works is if the government provides massive tax breaks or uses some sort of coercion through the tax code to get/make people buy GM/Chrysler.

The management at these companies was so atrocious for so long, it is just hard to imagine all that damage being overcome.

Hope I am wrong, but I am not optimistic.

No one will be buying cars.