R.I.P GM as we know it

[Drew Dowdell]

Keep in mind, I am not advocating any substantial takeover of GM by the government.... I just want the government there to right the ship. The economy is still in the crapper and it's going to continue to get worse. The "green shoots" the MSM keeps talking about are nothing but wishful thinking. The automotive market continues to decline albeit at a slower pace than before. An 8 million car market isn't impossible.

Once GM has been stabilized, the government should let go and let GM sink or swim.

[Drew Dowdell]

Point taken. Honestly Drew I just hope good can come from this and GM can live at this point even if products suck. (small boring FWD cars think Aveo's and Metro's) I am wondering what you think should happen to GM, and what kind of products we will have to buy, after the current product line gets updated?

Honestly I think even the stupidest political operative knows that GM needs interesting cars in order for it to thrive. I think what you'll see most is a lot of cutting of overlap.

Why does GM have so many 6-cylinder engine platforms? Why are there 3 Lambdas? Why are there 7 Epsilons.....

Stuff we've complained about for years.

At 29mpg, the Camaro is one of the most fuel efficient sports cars out there... why would they cut that?

I think the idea that we'll all end up in Aveos is completely unfounded. The politicos know that forcing GM into that model is just asking for VW, Toyota, and Honda to move in for the final kill.

Think of it this way.... if GM fails, it's now the governments fault. The government doesn't like to take the blame for anything.

[gm4life]

Honestly I think even the stupidest political operative knows that GM needs interesting cars in order for it to thrive. I think what you'll see most is a lot of cutting of overlap.

Why does GM have so many 6-cylinder engine platforms? Why are there 3 Lambdas? Why are there 7 Epsilons.....

Stuff we've complained about for years.

At 29mpg, the Camaro is one of the most fuel efficient sports cars out there... why would they cut that?

I think the idea that we'll all end up in Aveos is completely unfounded. The politicos know that forcing GM into that model is just asking for VW, Toyota, and Honda to move in for the final kill.

Think of it this way.... if GM fails, it's now the governments fault. The government doesn't like to take the blame for anything.

I hope your right, I am glad to hear you think government should let GM go free after this passes. Thanks for clarifying.

Edited May 20, 2009 by gm4life

[DetroitNut90]

It is in the government's best interest to see GM thrive. They don't want the unemployment, the want the tax base, they want the GDP.

That's my point, the government I'm sure doesn't want to see GM go under. They benefit much more from a strong, prosperous GM than a dead or functionally-incapacitated GM.

When in doubt of the government's motives here, ask yourself, why does the government need to kill GM when GM itself has shown it is plenty capable of doing that by itself?

[Camino LS6]

I think I've already said all I have to say on this.

[BuddyP]

"Sigh".....

Edited May 20, 2009 by BuddyP

[G. David Felt]

...oh...and I want to see GM get through this and go back to being a privately owned company. I am not for GM being owned by the government forever.

...and yes I believe government has their limitations, and no I never thought you said that all government was bad, gm4life.

We can disagree about religion and politics...but thankfully we both love GM.

Chris

I agree with you guys that I love GM too and in the short run will accept the gov ownership to get it on the road running, but then let it go back to being private.

In regards to Religion and politics, I personally preferre to keep them seperated, I see no reason that religion should be in politics, history shows this does not work. So I hope not to piss anyone off but love to voice in as I enjoy debates!

David

[cletus8269]

The government doesn't like to take the blame for anything.

I think politician camp for all elected officials engrains that in everyone before they take the oath

[A Horse With No Name]

Keep in mind, I am not advocating any substantial takeover of GM by the government.... I just want the government there to right the ship. The economy is still in the crapper and it's going to continue to get worse. The "green shoots" the MSM keeps talking about are nothing but wishful thinking. The automotive market continues to decline albeit at a slower pace than before. An 8 million car market isn't impossible.

Once GM has been stabilized, the government should let go and let GM sink or swim.

And here again is where we agree...

The economy is going to get MUCH worse IMHO. I think it will be 2022 before we really start pulling out of it...I would guess things won't start to turn around much before 2015.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

In regards to Religion and politics, I personally preferre to keep them seperated, I see no reason that religion should be in politics, history shows this does not work. So I hope not to piss anyone off but love to voice in as I enjoy debates!

David

Actually, I just know that gm4life and I disagree on both issues...but I really respect his and Drew's and everyone elses Love for GM. And I do mean love in the most profound, sloppy sentimental sense that there is.

Actually, now that SMK is gone I love every single person that posts here.

We just need to get over it and all have an all GM caravan somehwere...did I hear "road trip"

Chris

[Intrepidation]

T3H SKY IZ FALLING!1!

[cletus8269]

Actually, now that SMK is gone I love every single person that posts here.

Chris

yeah but unfortunately oldsmoboi is lonely now, smk was the

[FAPTurbo]

I thought I saw smk4565 hanging around earlier today; probably just lurking though.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

And here again is where we agree...

The economy is going to get MUCH worse IMHO. I think it will be 2022 before we really start pulling out of it...I would guess things won't start to turn around much before 2015.

Chris

2022 eh?

I'm a bit more optimistic than that, granted we wont have a very good economy since our levels of debt are far too high, but it wont be a recession.

[Lamar]

I thought I saw smk4565 hanging around earlier today; probably just lurking though.

Yeah, so did I.

[Drew Dowdell]

I thought I saw smk4565 hanging around earlier today; probably just lurking though.

Oh he's still here.... he just has duct tape over his keyboard.

[Drew Dowdell]

And here again is where we agree...

The economy is going to get MUCH worse IMHO. I think it will be 2022 before we really start pulling out of it...I would guess things won't start to turn around much before 2015.

Chris

I'm not willing to put a date on a turn around yet because we still haven't shaken out all of the bad stuff. Consumer debt is still way to high. We are witnessing the end of the "living beyond one's means" economic model and mentality. We're about 50% of the way through the personal mortgage shakeout. Only about 10% of the way through the credit card shakeout and maybe 25% of the way through the commercial credit/mortgage shakeout.

People who think that we will go back to the "way things were" need a slap in the face. People who think it would be good if we did get back there need an anvil dropped on their head.

[trinacriabob]

Actually, now that SMK is gone I love every single person that posts here.

all have an all GM caravan somehwere...did I hear "road trip"

What's the deal with SMK; what was that poster all about? Don't recall.

About the "road trip," we keep talking about it but never do it. LOL.

[daves87rs]

I'm not willing to put a date on a turn around yet because we still haven't shaken out all of the bad stuff. Consumer debt is still way to high. We are witnessing the end of the "living beyond one's means" economic model and mentality. We're about 50% of the way through the personal mortgage shakeout. Only about 10% of the way through the credit card shakeout and maybe 25% of the way through the commercial credit/mortgage shakeout.

People who think that we will go back to the "way things were" need a slap in the face. People who think it would be good if we did get back there need an anvil dropped on their head.

True, but people are not going to change overnight. And most people are greedy as hell. I don't expect people to just take it lying down.

Things are going to get quite ugly soon.....

[Lamar]

What's the deal with SMK; what was that poster all about? Don't recall.

Search the Cadillac forum for the longest threads you can find. You'll be reminded real quick.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

I'm not willing to put a date on a turn around yet because we still haven't shaken out all of the bad stuff. Consumer debt is still way to high. We are witnessing the end of the "living beyond one's means" economic model and mentality. We're about 50% of the way through the personal mortgage shakeout. Only about 10% of the way through the credit card shakeout and maybe 25% of the way through the commercial credit/mortgage shakeout.

People who think that we will go back to the "way things were" need a slap in the face. People who think it would be good if we did get back there need an anvil dropped on their head.

I FULLY agree with you olds. However i believe the current actions being taken to rectify this will only lead to greater living beyond ones means on the CONSUMER side... Now it may not be on the larger items such as houses and cars, but in the form of the small stuff on credit. However, since things will likely stay bad on the business side, the laws of supply and demand would dictate a rise in prices which would add to the upcoming inflation which will ultimately stifle growth since we cannot sustain a growth by inflation model. Alternatively the newest measures may simply not do anything, regardless i do not feel they will help anyone but those who made the worst of decisions at the cost of everyone else.

Problem being that both sides of our political realm have entrenched special interests and are not looking out for the general interest of society.

Additionally our money supply needs a good looking at, since that seems to be the greatest cause of both joy and malaise in our economy.

[Drew Dowdell]

The methods being used to "rectify" this are just attempting to return us to the status quo we had prior to the credit bust. That is like fighting with quicksand.

The fastest way out of this mess would have been to take ALL of that TARP money, and distribute it equally amongst all citizens above 18 years of age with the requirement that it be used to pay off debt first. The money would be applied in the order of highest interest rate to lowest interest rate and would be credited to the persons account directly by the federal government. No money would pass through the person's hands directly.

Simultaneously, in order to qualify for this money, the receiver would have to agree to have his/her non-mortgage, non-school loan, non car loan, cumulative credit limit capped at 30% of yearly gross income. New mortgages would be capped at 5 times annual gross income. New and used car loans would be capped at the equivalent of one year gross income.

Living completely debt free? Congratulations, you get money in your bank account with the above restrictions. Please consider buying a new domestic car.

The results of this would be:

1. It would completely recapitalize the banks.

2. It would stabilize and normalize the housing market because people would be better able to pay their home loans.

3. It would stimulate consumer spending, but it wouldn't allow people to spend beyond their means and get us back into this mess.

4. It would give those who are on unemployment a little more time to find new work.

Now, I'm not saying that the government should be handing out money..... but if you're going to do it... at least do it the right way.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Allright if we want to get into hypothetical never going to happen scenarios, here is mine:

I prefer to take the "well you will live with the decisions you made" approach and let the market absolutely tank for a period of time.

After everything falls to pieces it will rebuilt itself bigger and stronger than ever.

Should lead to a greater self-reliance in the people who realize that "big brother" won't come to help you fix your mistakes and that you have to fix them yourselves. Which in turn leads to greater personal responsibility which may hopefully spill over into the political spectrum.

But uh... it would be a really really realllllyyyy awful 3-5 years to accomplish a complete rework of the market by the market without government interference. On the plus side, it should be more robust and less prone to recession afterward.

Now for this to work, a lot of regulation, including minimum wage would need to be cut to expedite the process. Once unemployment hits very low levels (which it surely would without a minimum wage) then companies will have to start offering greater wages to its employees in order to entice the best workers and/or unions would form, either works. We would also have to return to a gold standard and eliminate the Federal Reserve to ensure that interest rates will never lead to people living beyond their means. And for the hell of it lets also have the federal government give up its education and highway funding with appropriate tax cuts to accompany.

End result:

-Collapse and Re-Expansion of the middle class to sizes larger than currently.

-Return of manufacturing to the US due to cheaper labor.

-Potentially greater personal responsibility and corporate responsibility.

-Decrease in size and scope of government.

-Surviving banks will be very strong and well capitalized.

-Consumer savings should be far higher which tends to lead to greater economic growth in the long run.

-Very probably increase in charities and other privately ran social programs or expansion of churches will greatly aid their respective communities in very targeted and appropriate for the community ways. Far better than any federal funding could hope to achieve.

-Return of power to the states to operate as they see fit. The decreases in Federal taxes will likely lead to an increase in state taxes which will allow states to provide quality education and build up their infrastructure in a more efficient and beneficial way to their state than a standard federal program could ever provide. Possibly leading back to the golden era of US education when schools were mostly private or state funded and not federally funded.

Edited May 21, 2009 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Drew Dowdell]

Here's the only problem I see with your plan. It ends up punishing the most innocent people in this "game" The rich might have to sell off a yacht and one of the houses in the Hamptons, but they'll still be ok. It's the working poor who will suffer most because they'll be the first ones to lose their jobs and then default on more loans and ruin what credit they did have which will just make the problem even worse. That will then work it's way up the food chain into the middle class and then slam into the neuvo riche. It will cause the financial institutions to collapse taking the auto manufacturers and even more retail with it. Right there you have depression era 25% or greater unemployement.

What my plan does is repair the issue without rewarding the people who brought this on us at the same time preventing it from happening again.

The TARP gave Bank of America a gazillion dollars.... did your mortgage balance go down at all? your credit card balance?

Again, I'm not for the government giving out money <loaning it, sure> because it causes inflation, but my plan increases cash money while reducing "fake" money, I.E. credit. The goal would be for the total money supply to net out slightly deflationary.

Edit: If what you propose was in place back in July, I think we would have crashed farther and faster than 1929 or 1933.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Here's the only problem I see with your plan. It ends up punishing the most innocent people in this "game" The rich might have to sell off a yacht and one of the houses in the Hamptons, but they'll still be ok. It's the working poor who will suffer most because they'll be the first ones to lose their jobs and then default on more loans and ruin what credit they did have which will just make the problem even worse. That will then work it's way up the food chain into the middle class and then slam into the neuvo riche. It will cause the financial institutions to collapse taking the auto manufacturers and even more retail with it. Right there you have depression era 25% or greater unemployement.

What my plan does is repair the issue without rewarding the people who brought this on us at the same time preventing it from happening again.

The TARP gave Bank of America a gazillion dollars.... did your mortgage balance go down at all? your credit card balance?

Again, I'm not for the government giving out money <loaning it, sure> because it causes inflation, but my plan increases cash money while reducing "fake" money, I.E. credit. The goal would be for the total money supply to net out slightly deflationary.

Edit: If what you propose was in place back in July, I think we would have crashed farther and faster than 1929 or 1933.

Oh i know it would totally ruin everything and make things bad for the worst off. BUT the point is that in the long run everyone is better off than they were before.

Your plan still puts us into debt whereas mine does not. Yours stabilizes and draws poor growth for a long period of time until said debt is repaid.

Mine drags us out of debt through government downsizing crashes the economy and allows it to rebuild from the ashes with very strong growth in the future.

Plus mine drags down inflationary powers of ALL kinds as well as relieving people of debt since they will all be bankrupt and thus debt free

[Satty]

Anyone else find it hilarious that the "GM as we know it" presented in the first posts of this thread are all from an era long gone? GM as we know it, and as we have known it for 20+ years has looked more like this:

[Dsuupr]

If GM added BAS II to every car they had now, they would achieve the government requirement without changing a thing. Yes, a V8 Camaro might cost $1500 more, but in the end atleast we would get to keep the 400+hp V8 in all it's glory, and you could have the opportunity to use the "pulse and glide" technique to try and get 30+ mpg with it.

[Dsuupr]

Oh i know it would totally ruin everything and make things bad for the worst off. BUT the point is that in the long run everyone is better off than they were before.

Your plan still puts us into debt whereas mine does not. Yours stabilizes and draws poor growth for a long period of time until said debt is repaid.

Mine drags us out of debt through government downsizing crashes the economy and allows it to rebuild from the ashes with very strong growth in the future.

Plus mine drags down inflationary powers of ALL kinds as well as relieving people of debt since they will all be bankrupt and thus debt free

Something to consider: Taxes for the 3% richest in the United States was not below 70% until the 80s. Infact during the strongest growth period of our country, 1940s, 50s, and 60s, taxes where at 90% for the upper income group.

Something else to ponder: In Japan and Europe, where CEOs make modest wages, income tax reaches 90% for those making in the millions. In the US, where CEOs make millions, taxes are 35%.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Something to consider: Taxes for the 3% richest in the United States was not below 70% until the 80s. Infact during the strongest growth period of our country, 1940s, 50s, and 60s, taxes where at 90% for the upper income group.

Something else to ponder: In Japan and Europe, where CEOs make modest wages, income tax reaches 90% for those making in the millions. In the US, where CEOs make millions, taxes are 35%.

You honestly believe growth would have been any different without those tax rates? Hell those tax rates probably actually helped because the government was so in debt at the time. But those are different times than now.

As for Japan, their economy isn't exactly stellar :AH-HA_wink:

Edited May 23, 2009 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[daves87rs]

Anyone else find it hilarious that the "GM as we know it" presented in the first posts of this thread are all from an era long gone? GM as we know it, and as we have known it for 20+ years has looked more like this:

Wonder how my car got on there?

[Dsuupr]

You honestly believe growth would have been any different without those tax rates? Hell those tax rates probably actually helped because the government was so in debt at the time. But those are different times than now.

As for Japan, their economy isn't exactly stellar :AH-HA_wink:

I think those tax rates did help and are something we should consider today.

[daves87rs]

I think those tax rates did help and are something we should consider today.

Sad, but I have to agree with that..

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

I think those tax rates did help and are something we should consider today.

Significant cuts in the government spending with no tax cuts does the trick too :AH-HA_wink:

The result is the same, the problem is the deficit. Deficits are always bad. Oh and the federal reserve.

Plus welfare doesn't exactly stimulate economic growth as evidenced by the past. So that's a potential area of cutting. Now government PAYING people for work DOES work and contributes to the GDP. So if you absolutely HAVE to have the government help the poor, give 'em government jobs not just a check. I would highly prefer it to not be this, but its better than the current system.

Anyways this is not a political thread so getting back on topic:

Edited May 23, 2009 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[vonVeezelsnider]

The girl- nice, the car- not so much

[daves87rs]

Significant cuts in the government spending with no tax cuts does the trick too :AH-HA_wink:

The result is the same, the problem is the deficit. Deficits are always bad. Oh and the federal reserve.

Plus welfare doesn't exactly stimulate economic growth as evidenced by the past. So that's a potential area of cutting. Now government PAYING people for work DOES work and contributes to the GDP. So if you absolutely HAVE to have the government help the poor, give 'em government jobs not just a check. I would highly prefer it to not be this, but its better than the current system.

Anyways this is not a political thread so getting back on topic:

[gm4life]

You know Satty your right GM has made some really boring cars in the past 25 years, like all other car makers including Toyota... But Toyota and the other makers never created any of these either...

Edited May 23, 2009 by gm4life

[gm4life]

And they made even more boring cars like these...

And now they are making boring cars like these...

Edited May 23, 2009 by gm4life

[DetroitNut90]

Nothing you are posting, aside from the two Grand Prixes, Monte Carlo, and possibly Bonneville and Aurora have been sold in significant quantities. We know that when GM puts its mind to it, it can come up with excellent products (CTS-V, GTO, Camaro, final Oldsmobiles), but their excellent products usually are not the everyday stuff, like a small car that doesn't compromise or a midsize sedan that is so good none of the rags can find a complaint. And that is GM's problem. They have not been consistently putting their minds into all of their cars up until very recently.

Edited May 23, 2009 by DetroitNut90

[gm4life]

Nothing you are posting, aside from the two Grand Prixes, Monte Carlo, and possibly Bonneville and Aurora have been sold in significant quantities. We know that when GM puts its mind to it, it can come up with excellent products (CTS-V, GTO, Camaro, final Oldsmobiles), but their excellent products usually are not the everyday stuff, like a small car that doesn't compromise or a midsize sedan that is so good none of the rags can find a complaint. And that is GM's problem. They have not been consistently putting their minds into all of their cars up until very recently.

I understand, I didn't buy my Bonneville because it was the fastest 6 cylinder fullsize front driver I could get, but because I loved the look of it and what Pontiac and Bonneville stood for. When you buy a Malibu or even Silverado you are still buying a car from a company that makes the excellent new Camaro and Corvette. I would say GM has created far better larger cars and trucks than small cars, and this is for as long as I can recall. What I am saying is when people were driving 4 cylinder Camry XLE's you could have had a Grand Prix GT, or an Impala SS for the same amount of money, why would you drive the Camry again? GM has made in my view lots of "fun" mainstream FWD products that don't drive pretty good and look great.

Edited May 24, 2009 by gm4life

[Satty]

The Grand Prix had an interior that would've been embarassing 20 years ago, plus no headroom in back. The Impala had the same piss poor interior and the nasty, noisy 3400 in a lot of cases. My 2000 Solara had a much more plush interior and smoother drivetrain than stuff GM was peddling 5 years after my car was new. The only advantage for GM was that the 3800 didn't require premium, but that was a small price to pay for that silky-smooth top-end power. There was a Monte Carlo on the lot next to the Solara when I bought it, and it was like night and day, the Toyota was comfortable and modern, the Chevy was ugly and archaic.

[gm4life]

The Grand Prix had an interior that would've been embarassing 20 years ago, plus no headroom in back. The Impala had the same piss poor interior and the nasty, noisy 3400 in a lot of cases. My 2000 Solara had a much more plush interior and smoother drivetrain than stuff GM was peddling 5 years after my car was new. The only advantage for GM was that the 3800 didn't require premium, but that was a small price to pay for that silky-smooth top-end power. There was a Monte Carlo on the lot next to the Solara when I bought it, and it was like night and day, the Toyota was comfortable and modern, the Chevy was ugly and archaic.

Sure so the interior on some of these cars was less than perfect. But I got back to my main point that while other compaines were creating REALLY boring cars GM was too, with some interesting options and sporty trim levels. That actually turned mainstream cars into pretty good driving products. I personally buy a car to drive it, enjoy it and use it. I didn't get an SLE because it had the best or softest interior plastics but I loved the cloth seat pattern and "cockpit" feel and the way it looked. I don't go around pushing on plastic to see if it is soft to the touch or care if everything is perfect, I care when I turn the key and drive it. I care how it will do its intend function, and as long as the interior doesn't rattle or creak I could care less honestly, unless it is just flat ugly. All those cars I posted photographs were semi-affordable cars that drove well within there class/market segment.

Edited May 24, 2009 by gm4life

[A Horse With No Name]

The result is the same, the problem is the deficit. Deficits are always bad. Oh and the federal reserve.

You are correct sir. And that 'bird is well done...

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

I understand, I didn't buy my Bonneville because it was the fastest 6 cylinder fullsize front driver I could get, but because I loved the look of it and what Pontiac and Bonneville stood for. When you buy a Malibu or even Silverado you are still buying a car from a company that makes the excellent new Camaro and Corvette. I would say GM has created far better larger cars and trucks than small cars, and this is for as long as I can recall. What I am saying is when people were driving 4 cylinder Camry XLE's you could have had a Grand Prix GT, or an Impala SS for the same amount of money, why would you drive the Camry again? GM has made in my view lots of "fun" mainstream FWD products that don't drive pretty good and look great.

The Impala SS is great so long as you don't get the V8.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

The Grand Prix had an interior that would've been embarassing 20 years ago, plus no headroom in back. The Impala had the same piss poor interior and the nasty, noisy 3400 in a lot of cases. My 2000 Solara had a much more plush interior and smoother drivetrain than stuff GM was peddling 5 years after my car was new. The only advantage for GM was that the 3800 didn't require premium, but that was a small price to pay for that silky-smooth top-end power. There was a Monte Carlo on the lot next to the Solara when I bought it, and it was like night and day, the Toyota was comfortable and modern, the Chevy was ugly and archaic.

I never knew you owned a Solara. Why did you get rid of it?

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

And they made even more boring cars like these...

And now they are making boring cars like these...

Love the FWD Monte SS. Saw one just like it in yellow today....

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

You know Satty your right GM has made some really boring cars in the past 25 years, like all other car makers including Toyota... But Toyota and the other makers never created any of these either...

The Grand National is just wonderful, gm4life...and the Grand Sport c4...Seems like John heinricy has one in his personal garage....

Chris

[FAPTurbo]

Whooooa, W-Body parade. Now I remember why the GM of old has resulted in the GM of today.

Edited May 24, 2009 by Captainbooyah

[Satty]

Whooooa, W-Body parade. Now I remember why the GM of old has resulted in the GM of today.

And thats GM as an entire generation knows it and why an entire generation wants nothing to do with GM.

[gm4life]

And thats GM as an entire generation knows it and why an entire generation wants nothing to do with GM.

I really don't think those W's were bad cars and were also pretty different from each other as far as styling went. Except for the Century/Regal.

[Satty]

I really don't think those W's were bad cars and were also pretty different from each other as far as styling went. Except for the Century/Regal.

You're also not part of a generation that grew up with imports that were far better than their domestic counterparts.