Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 71

Thread: Here is my letter I'm faxing to my Senators and Congressmen about the auto bailout

  1. #1
    Maneater JawZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    21,941

    Here is my letter I'm faxing to my Senators and Congressmen about the auto bailout

    The Honorable Frank R. Lautenberg
    324 Hart Senate Office Building
    United States Senate
    Washington, DC 20510


    While I do not fully agree with bailing out the auto industry, I do believe in assisting my fellow Americans.

    With that in mind, I do believe that any loans given out to any of the Big 3 automakers should come with one condition that will help protect and prevent “we the people” from ever having to go through this ever again.

    Each company should be broken up into smaller companies that are based on the type/class of vehicle that they manufacture/sell. This will prevent any one internal division failure from forcing the rest of the company into bankruptcy.

    Stock fund managers do this all the time….it’s called diversification which helps to distribute your risk across multiple financial sectors in order to prevent total investment losses. You are protected from having investments spread across multiple areas so if one area has a big downturn, the other areas of your investment portfolio don’t all suffer at the expense of one.

    GM should be broken up into smaller companies that represent the class of vehicles which they make so if GM SUV has a horrible fiscal year, it doesn’t affect GM Hybrid.

    This solution protects EVERYONE, from the taxpayer, to the auto worker, and everyone in between.

    Thank you for taking the time to read my letter.

    xxxx xxxxx
    xxx xxxxx xx
    xxxxxxx xx xxxxx
    xxx-xxx-xxxx
    xxxxxxx@comcast.net


    I x'd out my personal info for posting reasons.

    Just thought I'd share and I encourage all to contact their reps with their own personal thoughts. Senator Lautenberg actually requested that I fax him which says alot to me.



    EDIT: I have now included my 2nd version sent out today.

    The Honorable Robert Menendez
    317 Hart Senate Office Building
    United States Senate
    Washington, DC 20510

    Sir, after many hours of discussion, I would like to amend my earlier letter to you in hopes that it can help provide an innovative and reasonable solution to the auto industry woes that we are currently experiencing.

    I maintain that the Big 3 needs to be broken up into smaller companies but after much research, I think that the companies need to be based upon the manufacturing processes rather than the types of vehicles being constructed.

    There are two common legislatively enacted elements to all auto manufacturing that Americans demand; safety and emissions/fuel economy standards. If manufacturing efficiencies were to be found in providing for a common power train and chassis assembly that met both NHTSA standards as well as Federal emissions/ fuel economy standards, it would help eliminate redundancy and waste in that process. This could be applied to each stage of the manufacturing process. Companies could retain their unique styles by adapting their body or exoskeleton to a common powertrain/chassis based on market demand.

    For example, if Ford were to spin off it’s engine and chassis division and provide a limited set of power train/chassis classes (economy, sedan, truck, etc) that could be made available to the industry as a whole through partnerships, the entire industry would benefit. It would also protect the wealth of the industry because no one single point of failure could drag down the entire industry in the future. Vehicles need to be manufactured based on demand rather than output criteria.

    Of course this means adopting a radically new position and it would be a paradigm shift in how the industry functions. But at this point in time, the industry does not innovate and being that we are being asked to provide relief, it is not only our duty to respond, but also to mentor and guide and lead.

    We can not allow for another monopolization of failure. The Big 3 must be broken up into smaller companies based on the vehicle manufacturing process stage.

    Thank you for taking the time to read my letter.
    Last edited by JawZ; 12-12-08 at 12:03 PM. Reason: 2nd version letter

    ...formerly the omnipotent UOD

  2. #2
    Imperial Impotentate brembo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    crawlspaces
    Posts
    18,725
    Busting them up into smaller units isn't a solution for GM. The production lines are common fodder across the lines. Take Cadillac/Chevrolet for instance. The Escalade is a full-sized Suburban(Tahoe?) with fancy pants, as is the EXT Caddy truck thing(Avalanche sans tupperware body kit).

    What worries me is the idea of the "car czar", government oversight as to how a PRIVATE corp is going to do business. That's spooky IMO. I'm worried that the bailout is going to setup some ugly precidents that gets the government's foot in the door. I heard a number of 25 million being tossed around as a trigger for government oversight in terms of spending the bailout money, that's a bit easier to swallow than just a dude rubber stamping projects on "behalf of the government".

    The whole mess is honestly going to fall under the chicken salad theory in my book, "can't make chicken salad with chicken ****". Damned if we do, damned if we don't. Tho, I do think trying to prevent chapter 11 within Chrysler and GM is the right thing to do, the payoffs for minimal(hah) outllay of capital vs. the swirling fecalstorm that bankruptcy would cause are justified.
    Tao_Jones Cult Member since 2004
    I gave Miss Manners a Dirty Sanchez, and she LIKED it.

  3. #3
    Maneater JawZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    21,941
    Quote Originally Posted by brembo View Post
    Busting them up into smaller units isn't a solution for GM. The production lines are common fodder across the lines. Take Cadillac/Chevrolet for instance. The Escalade is a full-sized Suburban(Tahoe?) with fancy pants, as is the EXT Caddy truck thing(Avalanche sans tupperware body kit).

    What worries me is the idea of the "car czar", government oversight as to how a PRIVATE corp is going to do business. That's spooky IMO. I'm worried that the bailout is going to setup some ugly precidents that gets the government's foot in the door. I heard a number of 25 million being tossed around as a trigger for government oversight in terms of spending the bailout money, that's a bit easier to swallow than just a dude rubber stamping projects on "behalf of the government".

    The whole mess is honestly going to fall under the chicken salad theory in my book, "can't make chicken salad with chicken ****". Damned if we do, damned if we don't. Tho, I do think trying to prevent chapter 11 within Chrysler and GM is the right thing to do, the payoffs for minimal(hah) outllay of capital vs. the swirling fecalstorm that bankruptcy would cause are justified.
    We don't allow successful monopolies to exist in this country (cough cough). So what you are seeing is GM's own monopolized failure. they own their own failure because of just what you disagree with. The production items that are common to most GM models should be their own company. Let them figure out ways to do business with each other based on the market demands. Vehicles aren't units, they are component pieces.

    1. Streamline engine/drivetrain types
    2. Provide for a common chasis
    3. Streamline interior components
    4. Allow for constrained diversification in vehicle type


    I don't care how they achieve a breakup...but they need to be broken up imo to avoid company wide failure.

    What suggestions do you have to prevent another monopolization of failure?

    Give me good stuff and I'll amend my daily faxes lol.

    ...formerly the omnipotent UOD

  4. #4
    Second Most EVIL YARDofSTUF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    70,003
    Ya its not just GM, all auto makers only have a few platforms to develop their cars at one time.

    Splitting them up wouldnt work, but cutting out a few useless brands could help.

  5. #5
    Second Most EVIL YARDofSTUF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    70,003
    Quote Originally Posted by UOD View Post
    I don't care how they achieve a breakup...but they need to be broken up imo to avoid company wide failure.
    So if we break them up then who gets the platroms? If they are split up does that mean that the company then holding rights to the platform has to support the older models of the brand that split off from them? Or that the Split brand owners can no longer use their warranty?

  6. #6
    Maneater JawZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    21,941
    Quote Originally Posted by YARDofSTUF View Post
    Ya its not just GM, all auto makers only have a few platforms to develop their cars at one time.

    Splitting them up wouldnt work, but cutting out a few useless brands could help.
    If splitting them up wouldn't work, then why are we here? Why don't you see companies like Volkswagen getting bigger and bigger and bigger?

    GM keeps putting the same engines and drive trains in vehicles that don't sell....yet they hedge their bets on them because of the profit margins.

    You need to study the tech sector really close to see what they do and what they don't do. You need to look really close at how the tech sector has slumped because you will see the same reasons over and over and over.

    I learned at a very early age that if you do one thing good...keep doing it. Don't stray into thinking that you can do everything.

    Look at Dell and HP...perfect examples of what is going on today.


    Getting rid of useless models is a good idea.

    ...formerly the omnipotent UOD

  7. #7
    Imperial Impotentate brembo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    crawlspaces
    Posts
    18,725
    Quote Originally Posted by UOD View Post
    What suggestions do you have to prevent another monopolization of failure?

    Give me good stuff and I'll amend my daily faxes lol.

    Dude, I have NO earthly idea. GM is a sprawling hyper-massive furball of a corporation, so many facets to have to consider when trying to firm up it's bottom line. Well beyond my scope of understanding. I can only snipe and pick at what's being (possibly) required of the car makers to get their bailout funds.
    Tao_Jones Cult Member since 2004
    I gave Miss Manners a Dirty Sanchez, and she LIKED it.

  8. #8
    Maneater JawZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    21,941
    Quote Originally Posted by YARDofSTUF View Post
    So if we break them up then who gets the platroms? If they are split up does that mean that the company then holding rights to the platform has to support the older models of the brand that split off from them? Or that the Split brand owners can no longer use their warranty?
    dude, I do not have all the answers for every detail although I can tell you that based on today's news....warranties and auto worker retirements are on the chopping block. So even with this bailout, there is gonna be pain for everyone.

    I want to prevent that.

    I'm hoping that smarter people than me can capitalize on my idea which imo is sound. GM has grown too big for it's own good. Chrysler has tried to keep itself afloat by utilizing these methods. they make the Routan for VW.

    ...formerly the omnipotent UOD

  9. #9
    Advanced Member tarpoon75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NorthCarolina
    Posts
    678
    I say tell the UAW to go f@#k themselves
    Now, Hank, touch your throat. That tube you feel is your trachea. Think of it as your handle. That thing your thumb is on is your carotid artery. Think of it as your button. I want you to grab the handle, push the button.
    -Brock Samson

  10. #10
    Second Most EVIL YARDofSTUF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    70,003
    Quote Originally Posted by UOD View Post
    If splitting them up wouldn't work, then why are we here? Why don't you see companies like Volkswagen getting bigger and bigger and bigger?

    GM keeps putting the same engines and drive trains in vehicles that don't sell....yet they hedge their bets on them because of the profit margins.

    You need to study the tech sector really close to see what they do and what they don't do. You need to look really close at how the tech sector has slumped because you will see the same reasons over and over and over.

    I learned at a very early age that if you do one thing good...keep doing it. Don't stray into thinking that you can do everything.

    Look at Dell and HP...perfect examples of what is going on today.


    Getting rid of useless models is a good idea.
    Getting rid of the useless models is great, but you can't split them up, they don't have enough platforms to divide them.

    Why not jsut get rid of useless brands?

    GM keeps evolving their engines and drivetrains as well.

  11. #11
    Moderator YeOldeStonecat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Somewhere along the shoreline in New England
    Posts
    50,956
    An interesting article that PM had....notice the sharing of components between totally different brands even...such as Mazda and Volvo
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/auto...88.html?page=1

    4 pages of quick reading.
    MORNING WOOD Lumber Company
    Guinness for Strength!!!

  12. #12
    Imperial Impotentate brembo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    crawlspaces
    Posts
    18,725
    Quote Originally Posted by tarpoon75 View Post
    I say tell the UAW to go f@#k themselves
    If it were the UAW that was dragging down GM then chapter 11 would be a god send if I understand the nature of chap 11. Not to say that the UAW isn't a bit of a leech and creates hurdles at times. It's the monolithic inflexibility and serpentine nature of a MASSIVE corporation that's knee-capping GM right now. Chrysler has been cicrcling the bowl for awhile, Mercedes didn't do Chrysler any favors in the long run.
    Tao_Jones Cult Member since 2004
    I gave Miss Manners a Dirty Sanchez, and she LIKED it.

  13. #13
    Maneater JawZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    21,941
    Quote Originally Posted by YARDofSTUF View Post
    Getting rid of the useless models is great, but you can't split them up, they don't have enough platforms to divide them.

    Why not jsut get rid of useless brands?

    GM keeps evolving their engines and drivetrains as well.
    It's not a matter of enough platforms because we already know that they can make everything.

    When you say that they don't have enough platforms to divide them up, I think you are missing my point.

    For example....look at the Ford name itself. Study it.

    It's Ford MOTOR company. Why can't Ford or GM just spin off their motor and drive train divisions into separate companies and let the body styling guys find a way to market those engines in a common chassis provided by a different Ford/GM branded company?

    Look at VW....how many different engines do they have? Very few. It makes it so easy for them to put an engine which they are experts at making into a body style which is in demand...and they never overextend themselves.

    when I'm presented with a 6 page options package list for every GM vehicle out there in excel spreadsheet styling....there is something wrong.

    Again, it's about efficiencies.

    We can't prevent failure as long as they have a death grip on their own monopoly of failure.

    We need to have this discussion, the taxpayers. So I would rather debate you than leave it up to them....it's obvious that has failed.

    I wish I was a philosophy major in college because I think that' what could help with the end result.

    There needs to be a paradigm change in how we produce and utilize vehicles for personal use in this country.

    ...formerly the omnipotent UOD

  14. #14
    Second Most EVIL YARDofSTUF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    70,003
    UOD, I think that would only help to further weaken their brands.

  15. #15
    Ohh Hell yeah.. Sava700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    24,051

  16. #16
    Second Most EVIL YARDofSTUF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    70,003
    And sava's post points out another problem, people that think all the domestic vehicles are crap and gas guzzlers.

  17. #17
    SG Enthusiast Think's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    2,283
    Quote Originally Posted by YARDofSTUF View Post
    And sava's post points out another problem, people that think all the domestic vehicles are crap and gas guzzlers.
    Well, they are actually. Send the letter and I'm sure that if most everyone engaged in voicing there thoughts to congress then they would think ( try to, we don't want them to strane themselves ) twice before making such a rash decision under such corporate pressure.
    got old



  18. #18
    ♫♪ ♫♪ ♫♪ ♫♪ downhill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    My Own Private Idaho
    Posts
    34,796
    Quote Originally Posted by tarpoon75 View Post
    I say tell the UAW to go f@#k themselves
    Educate yourself on the current problems of the big three then come back and post your findings.

    Thank you very much.

  19. #19
    ♫♪ ♫♪ ♫♪ ♫♪ downhill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    My Own Private Idaho
    Posts
    34,796
    Sour grapes, Sava? IMHO, you'll be better off in the long run.


    UOD, we've touched on this before. GM wanted to drop off several lines in their current lineup a long time ago. Why didn't they do it? Because it would have cost them billions to buy out some of those dealerships.

  20. #20
    SG Enthusiast Think's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    2,283
    Quote Originally Posted by downhill View Post
    Sour grapes, Sava? IMHO, you'll be better off in the long run.


    UOD, we've touched on this before. GM wanted to drop off several lines in their current lineup a long time ago. Why didn't they do it? Because it would have cost them billions to buy out some of those dealerships.
    Not if they go bankrupt...which they will eventually.
    got old



Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •