At the same time the big three are pleading directly to the public for support for their ailing companies on You Tube, Facebook and Twitter, they are running national TV add campaigns touting the virtues of, among other things:
Driving their huge Dodge crew cab pick up trucks side by side down steep off road courses past waiving banners. And reminding people, that thing has a hemi in it.
Extolling the virtues of jacking their new 09 Ford F 150 pick ups so high off the ground that there is no longer a transmission hump in the interior.
Showing the ability of a General Motors pick up truck to survive having a large weight dropped onto its bed from a high place.
This is all fine and good but was aimed at stoking the automotive arms race that finally took a hit when gas spiked to $4.50 a gallon. That arms race started back in the 90's whereby any soccer mom could emulate Sigorni Weaver in the movie Alien by strapping on the biggest most powerful machine around and kicking some Alien tail. The Alien of course is a metaphor for the hyper caffeineated bumper to bumper traffic plaguing urban landscapes world wide.
I suppose what this all speaks to is the difference of where the American Automotive industry was heading when the product mix was planned and the accompanying TV adds booked versus the current reality they are now facing.
We used to have a place for companies who did not properly anticipate potential market swings and plan their product mix accordingly. Companies like Packard,, Hudson, Studebaker, and AMC.
The big three's argument is simple, it will hurt more to let us fail than to support us; and in that they may be correct; then again they may not be. Our trading partners are already chaffing at the idea of non market intervention by looking at appealing to the WTO.
Of course the big three promise, that if we just soak up a couple of million their super sized vehicles that are in the pipeline, the next time they will all be good, and please forget about the $4.50 a gallon gas as that was so yesterday. Of course those two million gas guzzling super sized vehicles will have an impact on the demand for the fuel which will ultimately affect the price. But what comes first the chicken or the egg?
To say I am ambivalent does not properly reveal the depth of the conundrum I see. The two faces, the one that is the Television advertisement face and the other that is the You Tube face just seem to project the unnerving image of a mirror reflecting something other than what is standing in front of it.

With all due repect you'd better do a bit more research.

The auto companies are looking for help and to get it they need public support because the government needs public support... big deal that's our world. We have to sell everything on TV...and the media...even reality.

Here's some facts:
The first GM bail out was in 1910! and the company founder was forced to resign.

Henry Ford went bankdrupt 2x. In each case he blew investor money developing race cars

10% of all jobs in North America and most of the free world revolve around car manufacturers.

Here's a question:
Was your last American car a Pinto or Vega in 1976?
I've had a 1967 and a 1968 Mustang - both were amazing. I had a 1972 Lemans - was over 300,000 miles on it whne it went to the wreckers
I had a 1992 Taurus and drove it like mad till last year! I also had 2 Saturns. The 1996 had 250,000 miles on it when I wrote it off. The most expensive
repair I had on it in 11 years was the alternator! IN fact almost 95% of the service was regualr maintenance.

Do you see any 1979 Honda civics in car shows?

Chevy Ford and Chrysler are the hearbeat pulse and blood of America, and the only reason they're in trouble is that the banks caused a massive financial crisis.
Have a look at the 65 mpg diesel that Ford is releasing next year...or the Chevy Volt

There's actually one other reason that they're in trouble...
People that work in North America should stop buying BMW for 4 times the price and bragging about how great it is.
I knew so many people that had VW trouble in the 70's when they tried to increase power output.

If God is to Bless America...America should bless it first!

When not buying a Detroit car was a vote.

Not buying the Dteroit companies would be an even better vote, if we get that option.

I sold my 66 Stange when it had 105,000 miles on it because every week it was another maintenance problem.

The 72 Mercedes I then bought had 485,000 miles on it when it was rear-ended at 25 mph back in 98. It still ran fine but was a foot shorter in the back, so I drove it until the next inspection was due - then sold it to a friend who had connections in the repair business. It is probably still on the road.

I couldn't find another 72 so I had to settle for an 83 which I am still driving - well over 400,000 miles on it. If Detroit made cars like that I would be the first to buy one.

PS. Checkout resale prices of cars sometime. I bought my MBZ new in 1972 for $5,830 and the insurance company gave me a check for $3,000 in 1998.

If people don't support our products we're screwed.

I highly doubt that everyone is going to want the same kind of car but somebody besides me must believe ine Ford, Chevy and Chrysler.

Look at the price of a new Mercedes dude - yeah sure the re sale is high. I'd love to see you try and race a GT500 at the light.

James, regardless of the validity or lack thereof of any of your arguments, I don't want to own stock in American automobile companies. Why should my government make that decision for me?

Detroit burned me twice, no more.

There is nothing worse than making payments on a car that is out of warranty yet needs reparis (not maintenance).

My personal experience:

American cars - major repairs within 30,000 miles not covered by builder.

Japanese cars - no major repairs within 60,000 miles or more.

Toyota, Hyundai, Honda, Mitsubishi are building cars in the U.S.

The UAW has to be broken up and sent down the river along with the idea that buying GM, Ford, Chrysler is patriotic.

I'm not interested in sacrificing my own income and retirement for someone else's; the government is already stealing money it won't repay.

Well, I have an SLK350 and a BMW Z3 tricked out by Hamann and Dinan. Perhaps the Z3 would win, but I have no interest in racing. Driving the speed limit for 500,000 miles in safety with low maintenance is my objective - and leaving them to my heirs when I pass on. Actually my goal was 1,000,000 miles but probably won't live that much longer now.

The point is that everybody should have the choice of what they drive - and not be made to pay for somebody else's car or car company.

Before we start panicking that North American auto companies are going to fail without a bailout, lets think about what's actually going on. How many of us have actually looked to see how many cars with "Asian" tags (Toyota, Mazda, Honda, etc) are actually made in North America? Turns out most cars sold in Canada, the US and Mexico are made in those same countries, regardless of the supposed manufacturer. Sure, the profits tend to get repatriated, but that's not the argument the (former) "Big Three" are using, they're talking about jobs.

On that subject, lets try to remember that bankruptcy (also known as chapter 11 down south) doesn't mean the end of the company, lay every one off, close the doors and go home. I can almost guarantee that even if Chrysler, Ford and GM go into chapter 11 tomorrow, the factories will keep making cars and the dealers will keep selling them. The odds of those three being wound up is almost nil. I would expect a sale and redistribution of the pieces. Mostly the executives are trying to save big pay-cheques.

Sure it will suck, especially for those who get laid off. I was just "impacted" about 3 weeks ago, and I can tell you it sucks, but it's not the end of the world. The guys who used to make cars (or at least most of them) will find a way to get by. The rest will (at least around here) get picked up by social programs until they figure it out. In the mean time, the remaining auto manufacturers in North America (including the Asian companies, who are still opening plants in North America) will keep doing what they're doing.

I see no need for another bailout. It has never worked in the past, we can expect it will continue to not work into the future.

Cheers,
Colin