Let the oil companies bail out the car companies

Why should the taxpayer foot the bill for incompetent management that kept producing bigger and bigger SUVs for the rethug crowd? The oil companies benefited from the big cars and oil companies need the car industry to keep demand for its products. They should bail out the car industry with its inefficient and clueless management.

It is so beautiful in it's irony. If they won't do it the taxpayer should demand much more fuel efficient cars for their money, etc.

I think I'll make it into a bumper sticker.

Let Big Oil Bailout the Big Three

Sure, they benefitted, but i don't think they colluded. I think the big car management was just idiotic and, as you said, incompetent. They didn't need the oil companies nudging them.

They were just stupid and made stupid mistakes. The oil companies benefitted, but they didn't have anything to do about the incompetence. They just got lucky.

So, there's no way they care about the car companies.
The Professor

if people keep doing the same thing, it benefits them to do so.

gm builds small, popular fuel-efficient cars - in other markets.

That has nothing to do with what i said.

GM builds what sells! They don't build Vauxhall in the UK to make a point on fuel efficiency. They build them there because that's what sells there.

I have much dispute with the way GM and Chrysler ran their companies, but it has little to do with fuel efficiency. Americans weren't asking for it in large numbers, we weren't ready for it large numbers, and when they did release them, nobody bought them. (See the Colt or the new Nova.)

They lacked vision, yes. But, there's a difference between stupid and collusion.

And besides, the oil companies, no matter how they benefitted, still don't care about the car companies. So, suggesting they bailout the car companies is just a pipe dream.

They couldn't care less.

They're going to sell gas no matter who makes the cars.
GAC

that "didn't sell"?

from what source does consumer desire spring?

They did good. But, it is usually considered a business mistake to pursue a niche that someone else already dominates.

So, you're agreeing with me and think you're arguing.
GAC

when you say gm makes "what sells," it doesn't explain their 30 years of giving up market share.

They made lots of stupid mistakes and had a pattern of doing the wrong thing. That doesn't mean i think they were in cahoots with the oil companies, and i don't think the oil companies needed any partners.

Want some personal examples of things i thought GM did stupidly:
1) In 1997 the Buick division decided that all models would be 4 door. This instantly eliminated the 18% of the market that prefers coupes.
2) After not introducing new models for 12 years each, Olds and Buick both did. Both SUV's. 8 Years after EVERYONE was selling those.
3) GM, with the exception of the Corvette, for 15 years made NO convertibles. They ceded that market to Chrysler, who's 5th most successful model EVER is the Sebring and the 6th most successful is the LeBaron.

So, i'm not defending them at all.

And as to giving up market share, part of that was product quality, not just product offerings. While it's not an accurate statement anymore, and hasn't been for way over 10 years, the perception has been created that the cars are not as good. So, the eroding market share isn't just because of the mileage.

Look, i've got a 14 year old Buick with a 6 cylinder engine that still gets 28 miles to the gallon. For a luxury coupe, there was NO car on the market, by any company, that did any better than that when we bought in 1995. The Camry had a rated mileage that was 1mpg lower than the rating of the car we bought. So, it's simply not true that everything Toyota or Nissan or Honda makes gets better mileage than the GM stuff.

And if they weren't making what "sold", please explain to me the sudden proliferation of the SUV! And why did Nissan, Honda, Isuzu, and Toyota release that product variant? I'm not imagining how many SUV's are out there. And check out the market fractions of those companies in that product niche. GM and Ford are not trailing in that field. So, the American people did buy those unnecessarily huge things.

Last time: I'm not defending the operation of, or the decision making of, the american car companies. All i said was that the OIL COMPANIES couldn't care less about whether the US car firms live or die. Then, we're arguing about whether the car companies are evil or stupid.

That's not even how this whole thing started. I was talking about the oil companies.
GAC

simply "incompetent" or "stupid" for 30 years. and this kind of "stupidity" has a historic pedigree.

people don't get to the top of the heap at places like gm by being stupid (in the conventional sense) or fearful.

lee iacocca said, back in '85, that gm & toyota were colluding.

for various reasons, i believe something along those lines.

We don't have to agree on the details here. We're in the same place philosophically, just different places as to motivation.

And, i think you can get to the top of the heap while being stupid. Not BY being stupid, but in spite of it. Ambition and a willingness to play politics can get one a long way.

So, we just don't see eye to eye on the details. That's ok.

Talk to you later, Hannah.
GAC

The two industries, auto and oil, did in fact collude to make sure Americans were provided the right equipment to guzzle up as much gas as possible.

How can something be a "stupid mistake" when it continues to go on and on and on for almost twenty years while the Asian and European carmakers were able to catch on to smaller fuel efficient automobiles and make huge wads of cash at the same time.

Calling the car companies the excuse of being mistaken or stupid is calling the Bush Adminstration of the same thing for invading Iraq....meanwhile all of us rubes are robbed of billions of our tax dollars.........

I don't buy all of it. Look, mileage has been shown to not be an issue as to how much money someone spends on gas.

If you get better mileage, you tend to drive more and the actual cost stays the same. So, the oil companies make their money either way.

I know that since we don't actually have hard data from any other scenario, it's just opinion, but the oil companies will make their money anyway. They don't need the help of the auto firms. And, quite frankly, there's nothing in it for the car companies.

Losing market share to makers of more efficient cars is hardly evidence in counter to incompetence.

The Professor

As long as it sucks gas the oil companies don't care where it comes from. Other countries make cars more efficiently than Detroit. People don't want American cars either, especially now that SUVs are verboten.

we don't need big oil with their thumb any more on the auto industry than it already is.
Black skies and filthy water all the way baby!!!!

and it follows logic.

thank you

... example of Car-ma I've heard all day.

You might be on to something!!!

However they could look at the car market and even develop a push for LPG or alternative fuel cars. Buy a discounted ford car, that can only be filled at say Shell (the nozzle could be adapted) and have the car tied to Shell for 2 or 3 years.

karmic satisfaction

why are they building a big plant in Russia? and since when has it become the taxpayers job to bail out poorly run businesses? You start a business and f*** it up, hey it's on you. Small business are failing everyday and I don't see the fed jumping in to help them. No, the failed owners go somewhere and try to get a job just survive. Without the fur coats or the fancy cars.

Well the market decided motherfuckers and guess what...you in the shit house now. They don't like what we decided so they're going to try to take our money anyway.

The oil companies certainly have the money and a vested interest in the success of the car companies, but they might not be as wiling to do the bailout if we tie the promotion of hybrids and higher mileage standards to the bailout, since our intention there is to wean us off dependence on the oil companies product.

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our fourth quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

:thumbsup:

The oil companies would only do this if they had some guarantee that the automakers would continue building inefficient gas guzzlers.

Check out this idea: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4451631

Great idea in my mind.

Let them take their trillions in profits and give life-support to the auto industry with it... :rofl:

I'm sick of hearing the whining from the "big" three. come on! it was poor management and planning that got them into this mess. Instead of retooling for fuel efficient cars, they've just increased their advertising for big trucks and SUV's, probably using the 25 billion loaned to them from our tax money. I agree let the Oil companies who benefited from the big three's poor management bail them out, not US.

Sounds like just the ticket.

.. you would think.... in a country as big as the United States... the oil company executives would talk to the Management of GM and Ford? Wouldn't that make sense? "Hello... Henry Ford? This is Chevron Oil. LIsten... oil is going to get expensive... you better build a fuel efficient car."

Does it take an MBA from Harvard for these guys to figure this stuff out?