Question: Is the government offering the auto industry enough support in its transition to a post-petroleum system?
Taylor: It is… I think it’s a fascinating subject and again, it’s a little dangerous to touch but it’s interesting that [IB] grossly oversimplify it, you know, and in our case, as part of the bill, it’s passed, that says, okay, well, [IB] you 25 billion loan and [IB], not bailout, not gift, not give, loan you 25 billion and then we come to, several months later, to a new [IB] and all of a sudden, an entire other industry, it melts down on a weekend and people rush to the table to look for a 6, 700 billion dollar gifts and the energy level around that is so high, compared to trying to find out reasons not to loan us 25 billion, it’s fascinating subject. Even this morning, [IB] reading an article, you know, all the articles in the papers [IB] Wall Street Times and USA Today [IB] not fair but, you know, one of the US Senators talking about, “Well, I’m not a fan of the US auto industry.” I thought to myself, “What are you thinking?” I mean, “What are you thinking? I’m not a fan of US auto industry.” You’re not a fan of jobs? You’re not a fan of manufacturing? Not a fan of technology? I mean, how he can say that and… and… again, I’m not going to say where he’s from [IB] auto plants and auto manufacturing and [IB] domestic. Okay, there’s [IB] back to Chryslers since, you know, their separation from Daimler but there’s a huge automotive installed manufacturing and job base as with Honda or Toyota, there’s a lot of manufacturers here. This is… this is a significant industry with a significant impact on the employee of this country in a tax base and some… the government officials, not all, [IB] their attitude towards to this industry escapes me.
Discuss
tim hall on April 20, 2009, 4:48 PM
I am not a big fan of corporate welfare and I grew up a G.M. brat. To compare Honda to G.M. in job availability is rather complicated. G.M. and Honda are not U.S. companies. They are both global. G.M. installs about 30% more made in America parts on their vehicals. But that is changing by the year.
My concern is economic impact. If the economic think tanks say we have to pay for this company, I don’t have the expertise to argue. I do know that G.M. does not have anything in the works that the masses would benifit buying over the Asians. The Volt is priced out of the masses reach. Their mid size family vehicles won’t meet 2012 emmission standards. They are producing an all new 2010 Buick LaCrosse with cloth seats, 18 mpg city, for $28,000. Does that sound like change to you? How does that stack up to a Ford Fusion, Toyota Camery or Honda Accord?
My other question is, could we provide new jobs for this auto connected work-force? It looks like we can, but it might be an eight to ten year ordeal. Personally, I would like to turn G.M. into an innerurban coach builder. At least we could get some benifit from our corporate welfare. One way or another we have to pay for my fathers expensive retirement because our government signed an illegal agreement with them years ago.
petty deh on May 14, 2009, 2:57 AM
I think giving financial help to the industry is another path to take. It means, more stunning vehicles, more modified car parts (ex: brake caliper), more reliable cars, etc. No more trial and error here. This time, the industry should make it.
Sarah Shane on July 3, 2009, 9:06 PM
I like how he gives billions of dollars away to all these foreign bankers on a whim, yet when it comes time to support a company that has been the backbone of the country for almost a 100 years, nothing for them.
It makes me believe they dont want to support america with our money …just giving it away to other countries. A great way to divide the rich and the poor in this country.
Keep up the good work!!!
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register