Fundamental Restructuring of GM
03-30-2009, 03:18 PM
#23
Le Mans Master
Baring a worse situation that could lead to civil war, he's got about 3.5 years left. 
And a "government panel" says GM's plan has no chance to succeed? How about what the CBO said about the stimulus plan? Why do only some government panels get to be believed?
Maybe in 2 years people will understand that change and hope are not plans. Then maybe we'll get some people who will actually allow reading of bills before voting on them.
And a "government panel" says GM's plan has no chance to succeed? How about what the CBO said about the stimulus plan? Why do only some government panels get to be believed?
Maybe in 2 years people will understand that change and hope are not plans. Then maybe we'll get some people who will actually allow reading of bills before voting on them.
03-30-2009, 03:29 PM
#25
Le Mans Master
Baring a worse situation that could lead to civil war, he's got about 3.5 years left.
And a "government panel" says GM's plan has no chance to succeed? How about what the CBO said about the stimulus plan? Why do only some government panels get to be believed?
Maybe in 2 years people will understand that change and hope are not plans. Then maybe we'll get some people who will actually allow reading of bills before voting on them.
And a "government panel" says GM's plan has no chance to succeed? How about what the CBO said about the stimulus plan? Why do only some government panels get to be believed?
Maybe in 2 years people will understand that change and hope are not plans. Then maybe we'll get some people who will actually allow reading of bills before voting on them.
No time to read bills when you are on a record setting pace towards socialism.
03-30-2009, 03:33 PM
#26
Safety Car
Member Since: Mar 2009
Location: Northeast MA & Mad Beach FL
Posts: 4,101
Received 716 Likes
on
436 Posts
It looks good to the general public for the Goverment to shaft someone else to draw attention away from the fact the Government and Banks are one in the same reason for this mess.
With the credit failure, people lost their buying power and now the Government can "say" the auto industry is not making vehicles people want.
In the words of George Carlin.... It's All a Big Lie Man .. or was that Tommy Chong
03-30-2009, 03:36 PM
#27
Burning Brakes
I think the restructuring could be good for Corvette..
Lutz and Wagoner should have been canned years ago.
Corvette may come out as a specialty product, as long as it is profitable. It is unique, an icon and I think a stand alone product.
It can only get better. The downside I think is, as someone said, no more big v8's.
03-30-2009, 03:46 PM
#28
Safety Car
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: Pleasanton California
Posts: 3,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see a lot of complaining here about the government. Last I checked though, it was the big 3 that took a trip at to Washington, hats in hand, looking for some cash.
So the bottom line is if you are going to beg for money, you have to agree to the terms to who is giving it out to you. If you don't want to do that, then don't ask for the money.
So the bottom line is if you are going to beg for money, you have to agree to the terms to who is giving it out to you. If you don't want to do that, then don't ask for the money.
03-30-2009, 03:59 PM
#29
Race Director
Member Since: Dec 2007
Location: Maumelle Arkansas
Posts: 18,959
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
St. Jude Donor '13-'14-'15-'16-'17
Quit kidding ourselves
We can talk about this all we want too, but Corvette is gone. It's not on the list of cars the "liberal politicians" want GM to concentrate on. That would be electric cars and alternate fuel vehicles. One report I saw indicated a $30,000 tax on SUV's to help subsdize alternate fuel and electric cars.
That way all the rich people that just have to have an SUV will help fund the transition to alternate fuel vehicles.
Your biggest concern should be parts. I expect the restructured GM will quickly stop building parts for V8's as quick as Washington tells them to, it will help get them off the street.
And don't be surprised at a retroactive luxury tax on owned Corvettes, and other "luxury" vehicles.
In a socalistic society "individuals" just can't have something the rest of the masses can't. It's not fair. If the government can't provide everyone with a Corvette then nobody should have one.
The sad thing is a majority of people will agree to this nonsense.
LJ
That way all the rich people that just have to have an SUV will help fund the transition to alternate fuel vehicles.
Your biggest concern should be parts. I expect the restructured GM will quickly stop building parts for V8's as quick as Washington tells them to, it will help get them off the street.
And don't be surprised at a retroactive luxury tax on owned Corvettes, and other "luxury" vehicles.
In a socalistic society "individuals" just can't have something the rest of the masses can't. It's not fair. If the government can't provide everyone with a Corvette then nobody should have one.
The sad thing is a majority of people will agree to this nonsense.
LJ
03-30-2009, 04:08 PM
#32
Le Mans Master
I see a lot of complaining here about the government. Last I checked though, it was the big 3 that took a trip at to Washington, hats in hand, looking for some cash.
So the bottom line is if you are going to beg for money, you have to agree to the terms to who is giving it out to you. If you don't want to do that, then don't ask for the money.
So the bottom line is if you are going to beg for money, you have to agree to the terms to who is giving it out to you. If you don't want to do that, then don't ask for the money.
03-30-2009, 04:10 PM
#34
Le Mans Master
03-30-2009, 04:33 PM
#36
Racer
We can talk about this all we want too, but Corvette is gone. It's not on the list of cars the "liberal politicians" want GM to concentrate on. That would be electric cars and alternate fuel vehicles. One report I saw indicated a $30,000 tax on SUV's to help subsdize alternate fuel and electric cars.
That way all the rich people that just have to have an SUV will help fund the transition to alternate fuel vehicles.
Your biggest concern should be parts. I expect the restructured GM will quickly stop building parts for V8's as quick as Washington tells them to, it will help get them off the street.
And don't be surprised at a retroactive luxury tax on owned Corvettes, and other "luxury" vehicles.
In a socalistic society "individuals" just can't have something the rest of the masses can't. It's not fair. If the government can't provide everyone with a Corvette then nobody should have one.
The sad thing is a majority of people will agree to this nonsense.
LJ
That way all the rich people that just have to have an SUV will help fund the transition to alternate fuel vehicles.
Your biggest concern should be parts. I expect the restructured GM will quickly stop building parts for V8's as quick as Washington tells them to, it will help get them off the street.
And don't be surprised at a retroactive luxury tax on owned Corvettes, and other "luxury" vehicles.
In a socalistic society "individuals" just can't have something the rest of the masses can't. It's not fair. If the government can't provide everyone with a Corvette then nobody should have one.
The sad thing is a majority of people will agree to this nonsense.
LJ
03-30-2009, 04:40 PM
#37
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bottm line: So today we just saw the future- High HP, perceived gas guzzler, and big CO2 footprints cars just became the new dinasours of the modern age.
The future looks bright for the right vette at the right time. Carpe-Diem.
03-30-2009, 04:42 PM
#38
Safety Car
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: Pleasanton California
Posts: 3,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-30-2009, 04:42 PM
#39
Le Mans Master
Should be interesting to see what your going to think a few years from now.
For me it is not a matter of hate. It is disappointment.
His inexperience rears it's ugly head every single day just a little more. And even a bit more without a TelePrompTer.
For me it is not a matter of hate. It is disappointment.
His inexperience rears it's ugly head every single day just a little more. And even a bit more without a TelePrompTer.
Last edited by Vette Suspension; 03-30-2009 at 05:00 PM.
03-30-2009, 04:56 PM
#40
Safety Car
So many people are assuming that the government's statement implies they think they can run GM better than GM. But GM has publicly stated that their plans to get healthy included concessions from labor, and brand and plant closures. Even before they provided their plans to the government, they indicated these things would be necessary to avoid bankruptcy.
Now we're at the point where the government has pumped a bunch of money, but that doesn't change the fact that GM's labor contracts and legacy costs still make them highly uncompetitive. And the Unions still haven't budged.
Do you honestly think the Government has come up with this approach on their own? They've seen what GM's said they need to do, and there are certainly other discussions ongoing about what changes would ideally happen to give GM the best chance of surviving. So GM says - here's our plan... it would be a better plan if we had gotten the concessions, or if we could close brands without huge payouts to dealers, but it's the best we can do under the current circumstances. And the government says - That plan's not good enough... so you'll have to take the next steps.
As much as I hate to think that people will lose jobs and dealerships, and retirees will lose benefits, it's either that, or we (the public) continue to pay for bad decisions by a company that shouldn't be in business any longer.
This is what should have happenned with AIG... BEFORE the money is given, you figure out if the business is viable with just a temporary infusion of money, or how you can eliminate the past bad contracted obligations.
Now we're at the point where the government has pumped a bunch of money, but that doesn't change the fact that GM's labor contracts and legacy costs still make them highly uncompetitive. And the Unions still haven't budged.
Do you honestly think the Government has come up with this approach on their own? They've seen what GM's said they need to do, and there are certainly other discussions ongoing about what changes would ideally happen to give GM the best chance of surviving. So GM says - here's our plan... it would be a better plan if we had gotten the concessions, or if we could close brands without huge payouts to dealers, but it's the best we can do under the current circumstances. And the government says - That plan's not good enough... so you'll have to take the next steps.
As much as I hate to think that people will lose jobs and dealerships, and retirees will lose benefits, it's either that, or we (the public) continue to pay for bad decisions by a company that shouldn't be in business any longer.
This is what should have happenned with AIG... BEFORE the money is given, you figure out if the business is viable with just a temporary infusion of money, or how you can eliminate the past bad contracted obligations.