"Give them billions of taxdollars," I warned in November, "and in a few years they'll just need another transfusion." A few years? Try a few months. Washington's bailout of Chrsler and General Motors didn't work. How do I know? It's less than three months since the initial $34 billion bailout, and the automakers are asking for more, more, more. The original bailout was contingent on a corporate plan for solvency. The plans submitted demand another bailout, which is their idea of solvency. One sympathizes with a hungry Oliver Twist when he petitions his workmaster, "I want some more." GM and Chrysler's pleas for more somehow fail to elicit such feeling.

Dan, as per one of your previous posts, what is to say that any of this will work? What bothers me most about these bailout/stimulus measures is the accountancy that is not involved. What are the benchmarks we're looking for in the next six months, year, or two years to indicate whether we're on the right track or not? Isn't it irresponsible for our politicians/execs to simply say that we won't know if it works until two years down the road? That seems a bit disingenuous.

If if it doesn't work...?

They WILL go out of business as their current model is unsustainable.

Add to that Washington getting their fingers into the pie as the Big Three are close to being a fully owned subsidiary of the Federal government, similar to how the Democratic Party is close to being a fully owned subsidiary of the UAW. They are already putting wrong headed standards on how and what kind of automobiles Detroit should be building.

Ultimately, the big boys will take the Fed money and run while they watch the U.S. auto industry go down the tubes. Might have noticed in the last couple of weeks that they had thousands laid off. Not union guys but middle management. Now that’s showing them how to trim the fat!

The real problem is that it should have happened in the first place as a natural consequence of the market without our dough.

Hey, if you like this, you’ll love O’s new plan for mortg@ge relief. It’ll only cost $75 billion (let’s double that) and will let the government set and freeze interest rates and assess and value private property.

I'm sure this will work.

You say that what's good for GM isn't good for America. Would you say that what's good for Toyota, Honda and Mitsubishi is good for America?? As you know, those companies don't let labor unions into their plants in the USA and they sell their products, in many cases, under the cost of production. Realy good for the USA???

"They sell their products, in many cases, under the cost of production."

Good for the American consumer.

If the U.S. auto industry wants to stand any chance, they need to stop asking for bailouts and start asking for higher tariffs on foreign cars. Consolidate the problem, then move back into the global market. As a student studying engineering, I can tell you that we are years behind foreign technology when it comes to manufacturing energy efficient vehicles. And in an economy where MPGs are more attractive than any H2(seriously though, smart cars and hybrids are ugly as shit), the only chance of rebounding isn't going to come into play because of a burst of money, it's going to be from a burst of demand.

And in response to Ralph and this article in general, do you have any idea how dependent our economy still is on auto production. Telling our consumers to buy foreign cars would be like telling China to stop manufacturing plastic goods. Whether you think foreign cars are good for America or not, Engineering is still the #1 source for revenue and still houses the greatest potential for this country, or any other for that matter. Giving up on Auto manufacturers simply isn't an option anyone should be ok with.