Automotive Bailout vs. the morons in Washington

[kexodusc]

Not to over-simplfy, and as usual kex you're right on the money, but more and more, each day that goes by I want to just move the hell out of this country.

BTW,

$75 billion to help stop mortgage foreclosures.

$750 billion+ to bail out the banks (Greenspan says nationalizing the banks may not be a bad idea)

$17 billion and potentially $30 BILLION more for the auto makers

Nationalization? Isn't that what happaens in SOCIALIST countries?

Rich we've got to unlearn a lot of the half-truth political ideologies we've been taught. A lot of that talk is just black and white bull**** that doesn't exist in reality, and the politicians use it to divide us. If we were at war with an aggressor, we'd expect tax funds to go to a SOCIALIST program called the army to defend us. Police, fire fighters, etc...those are noble. But a national regulated economic system built to protect society from the threat of unchecked greed and dishonesty is somehow socialist? No way.

As undesirable as it is, I think a bailout is far better than the alternative. This is a controlled descent instead of a nosedive. We're all going down fast, but more of us will survive this way.

If you want to think of it in political rhetoric terms...it's America investing in America, rather than turning its back on itself. "Not my problem" and "everyman for himself" got us into this mess.

[nightflier]

A lot of good points, but I'd like to point out that the "the jacka$$'s in DC", i.e. our current president and his new government, were urging that conditions and transparency be placed on the bank bailout, back when the last administration & congress just wanted to give them a blank check. I also have to side with Kex that the Unions, for all their past errors, aren't the biggest problem with the automakers' woes. Yes, I know they jumped on the SUV bandwagon, but the CEO's & upper management have been behaving like hogs for far too long as well. The private jets to Washington, the golden parachutes, and corporate vacations are an affront that should be tempered.

Likewise, the companies themselves have made this bed they now have to lay in. Maybe everyone should revisit Who Killed the Electric Car? If that was not arrogance and waste, then I don't know what is. It also wasn't just the 70s that saw pathetically bad engineering, either. I remember the 80's duds too, the Dodge Aries K, the Buick wanabe luxury look-alikes, and the monikers for Ford's Taught-us, the Fucus, the Mustink, and the Exploder. Then there's the whole Hummer nonsense, the pathetic Jeeps, and the SUV one-upsmanship of the last few years. These are all more recent memories. There were some good cars, but also a lot of bad ones, and more importantly a lot of unnecessary ones looking for imagined new niches. Our car industry depended too much on continued, unrealistic growth and that was bound to end someday.

Also a note on the bank bail-out: in case people missed it, this was a knee-jerk reaction to a run on our whole monetary system. It wasn't something that could have been avoided. Yes, more heads should have rolled and accountability & transparency should have been included in the final drafts, but the bail-out needed to happen to keep Western banking alive. Of course, this wasn't the first time this happened, and we really haven't learned from those past mistakes, but because we haven't, the tax-payers had to once again bail someone out. My guess was that the last administration in Washington was hoping that the party would last until after they were out of office, only it didn't. Want to know were all that money went? Try pay-offs, graft, corruption both in the private sector and with government contracts. They knew the party would end and they did nothing to right the ship as it was heading off-course - they only hoped it would stay afloat long enough to survive the last election and it didn't. When the crap hit the fan, they made the fix such a poisoned pill that the next administration would surely choke on it. Well, we'll see if that will actually happen.

This is a correction, not unlike others we've had, though probably just as severe. Our way of life, our love affair with cars, bad food, self-pampering, limitless investments, entertainment, and even overly expensive audio gear, however small a portion of this issue that is, cannot sustain itself indefinitely. The disparity between our lives and those of the majority of the rest of the world is too great to be economically sustainable. $71 per hour? $30 per hour? $10 per hour? Try $2 per week, and in some cases less than $1 per week. That's disparity. And then when you consider that some of us, like the CEOs of some of these banks, make $200-300 per hour? That's beyond obscene.

By the way, I'm not just speaking from a distance. My brother is an engineer for a major American manufacturing company (yes, they still exist), and his job is also on the line. Four members of his team (of 10) have already been fired. His wife lost her job in advertising six months ago. I've agreed to take a pay-cut to keep my job, and my wife was told that by this Summer her whole department will be eliminated (35 people out of work). My father was forced into early retirement, and my sister and her husband had to move to the Far East to keep working. This is a major correction, all right.

[3-LockBox]

The average wage in the US is ...$31.00/hr?

Say what?!?! exsqueez me? baking powder?

Oh please missah Brer Fox, don't throw poor old me in dat der briar patch...

bwahahahahahah...I would love, LOVE, LOVE to make 31 bucks an hour

I wonder how someone came up with that kinda figure. If a non-union company started a factory making cars in say, Ferndale WA, they'd start somewhere around $11-$12 per hour, maybe even less, and certainly not much more. They'd top out around $16/hr.

BTW: Didn't read that somewhere, I LIVE IT! I got outta electronics because the pay was low. I made as much cleaning sh!tters as I did fixing telephone equipment. I hate to come off like a jackass, but how bad am I supposed to feel about what is a small percentage of wage earners in this country? How much bailout burden do real people get to shoulder? How much money does the government get to throw at companies who haven't shown good faith with their own funds? And how many high paying jobs does this save? Is there a real cost benefit analysis to this bailout? And is there any guarantee that these same companies won't move factories over-seas as soon as they get their money?

The majority of people living in this country make less than 'living wage'. And that includes all kinds of jobs and so-called careers, not just janitors and berry pickers.

[kexodusc]

The average wage in the US is ...$31.00/hr?

Say what?!?! exsqueez me? baking powder?

Oh please missah Brer Fox, don't throw poor old me in dat der briar patch...

bwahahahahahah...I would love, LOVE, LOVE to make 31 bucks an hour

I wonder how someone came up with that kinda figure. If a non-union company started a factory making cars in say, Ferndale WA, they'd start somewhere around $11-$12 per hour, maybe even less, and certainly not much more. They'd top out around $16/hr.

BTW: Didn't read that somewhere, I LIVE IT! I got outta electronics because the pay was low. I made as much cleaning sh!tters as I did fixing telephone equipment. I hate to come off like a jackass, but how bad am I supposed to feel about what is a small percentage of wage earners in this country? How much bailout burden do real people get to shoulder? How much money does the government get to throw at companies who haven't shown good faith with their own funds? And how many high paying jobs does this save? Is there a real cost benefit analysis to this bailout? And is there any guarantee that these same companies won't move factories over-seas as soon as they get their money?

The majority of people living in this country make less than 'living wage'. And that includes all kinds of jobs and so-called careers, not just janitors and berry pickers.

I'm not just worried about the impact of thousands of UAW jobs disappearing, but also the impact that will have the communities around those jobs. Think of just about thing that those UAW folks spend money on. Discretionary and staple industries feel the pain. It's all going to be cut, some of it almost to zero, all of it significantly.

On just the retail side of things -dealerships feed feed local business. They hire mechanics, lawyers, architects, engineers, plumbers, landscapers, accountants, salespeople, painters, IT folks, admin staff, car washers, security, etc, The trucking/transport industry relies on auto heavily. All taxable income which is needed to pay off the bank-bailouts

I have no idea how many people work at car dealerships in the USA, but I know a few years ago it was well over a million. I know my grandfather's employed 50+ people. When that business went under a lot of those people struggled to find other work. There's over 6000 GM dealers alone, 20,000 or so dealerships across the country. A few hundred thousand jobs disappearing doesn't help anyone. Most of those jobs aren't exactly super high wages either, but they feed people.

A few million unemployed people is going to reduce national productivity, put downward pressure on wages and upward pressure on taxes for everyone.

[IBSTORMIN]

By the way, I'm not just speaking from a distance. My brother is an engineer for a major American manufacturing company (yes, they still exist), and his job is also on the line. Four members of his team (of 10) have already been fired. His wife lost her job in advertising six months ago. I've agreed to take a pay-cut to keep my job, and my wife was told that by this Summer her whole department will be eliminated (35 people out of work). My father was forced into early retirement, and my sister and her husband had to move to the Far East to keep working. This is a major correction, all right.

I was feeling good about my job. The company's financial position was shown to be good in a meeting on Tuesday. 2008 sucked due to things beyond our control but 2009 is looking good so far. Our CEO has positioned us over the last two years to make us strong financially, better than most in our industry. Today it was anounced that our CEO of 8 years is being replaced by someone else in the company. In the anouncement it praised the former CEO for the job he did in the last 8 years. There was no explaination of why or where he is going. Now I'm worried.

[Feanor]

I'm not just worried about the impact of thousands of UAW jobs disappearing, but also the impact that will have the communities around those jobs. Think of just about thing that those UAW folks spend money on. Discretionary and staple industries feel the pain. It's all going to be cut, some of it almost to zero, all of it significantly.

On just the retail side of things -dealerships feed feed local business. They hire mechanics, lawyers, architects, engineers, plumbers, landscapers, accountants, salespeople, painters, IT folks, admin staff, car washers, security, etc, The trucking/transport industry relies on auto heavily. All taxable income which is needed to pay off the bank-bailouts

I have no idea how many people work at car dealerships in the USA, but I know a few years ago it was well over a million. I know my grandfather's employed 50+ people. When that business went under a lot of those people struggled to find other work. There's over 6000 GM dealers alone, 20,000 or so dealerships across the country. A few hundred thousand jobs disappearing doesn't help anyone. Most of those jobs aren't exactly super high wages either, but they feed people.

A few million unemployed people is going to reduce national productivity, put downward pressure on wages and upward pressure on taxes for everyone.

All true and I agree, Kex. But we, (US & Canadian taxpayers), should not be expected hand over money to NA automakers so they can repeat the mistakes of the past. Nor should we be expected to protect the wealth of their shareholders and UAW members. We need solutions that are detached from the self-interests of these groups: they made their mistakes and deserve the consequences.

The NA industry needs to be recreated with a strategic focus on reducing reliance on foreign energy and other resources, protecting the environment, and acknowledging the realities of global labor market.

[topspeed]

There have been a lot of great viewpoints voiced here without drawing political lines, and I applaud all of you for your restraint because I know from threads past how easy a flame war can burst out.

It's ironic that Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama has been one of the most vocal opponents for the domestic bailout, yet he didn't seem to mind as his state glad-handed over $2 billion in incentives to Mercedes, Honda, Toyota, and Hyundai in recent years. Support the foreign makes and then complain about domestic's "failed business model" and how we aren't making competitive vehicles. How 'bout leveling the playing field and then we'll talk about "competitive" models, eh Dick?

[Kevio]

The average wage in the US is ...$31.00/hr?

Say what?!?! exsqueez me? baking powder?

This shows you the distinction between average and median. In the average, one white guy making $30 million provides statistical cover for for thousands making $6 an hour.

In the median, he's just one guy that makes more than most anyone else.

[kexodusc]

All true and I agree, Kex. But we, (US & Canadian taxpayers), should not be expected hand over money to NA automakers so they can repeat the mistakes of the past. Nor should we be expected to protect the wealth of their shareholders and UAW members. We need solutions that are detached from the self-interests of these groups: they made their mistakes and deserve the consequences.

The NA industry needs to be recreated with a strategic focus on reducing reliance on foreign energy and other resources, protecting the environment, and acknowledging the realities of global labor market.

Points I won't argue. To be fair, the US auto co's will tell you that's exactly what they're trying to do. I'm just not as optimistic as them. We'll see.

Who knows. Maybe this time they get it right.

Speedy's right though...there's been a lot of double speak from the politicians, all stripes.

I like your last point - acknowledging the realities of global labor market. I don't think we fully understand exactly what those realities are.

[kexodusc]

This shows you the distinction between average and median. In the average, one white guy making $30 million provides statistical cover for for thousands making $6 an hour.

In the median, he's just one guy that makes more than most anyone else.

Sadly, the $6/hr is probably closer to the mode...

[3-LockBox]

In the average, one white guy making $30 million provides statistical cover for for thousands making $6 an hour.

My point exactly. Heaven forbid a bunch spoiled rotten UAW workers (who share at least 1/3 the blame) should be forced to live...like regular folk.

[Feanor]

....

I like your last point - acknowledging the realities of global labor market. I don't think we fully understand exactly what those realities are.

$0.10 - $0.15 on the dollar is the global reality.

I'm currently working with a couple of systems analysts from India. I'm not management so I don't know the number but I'm told we pay these guys, (who are doing a decent job), "substantially less than local contractors". The self-employed local contractors here in London, ON, get $70-$90 an hour, so maybe the Indian guys get $50/hr at most.

More specifically, the Indian company that contracts them gets $50/hr. Their Indian company flies them from India, pays their room & board while they're here, pays them a bonus India salary and whatever benefits, and still pockets profit. You've gotta figure ...

[3-LockBox]

More specifically, the Indian company that contracts them gets $50/hr. Their Indian company flies them from India, pays their room & board while they're here, pays them a bonus India salary and whatever benefits, and still pockets profit. You've gotta figure ...

Yeah, about 15 years ago I used to repair photocopier machines, faxes, telephones, you know...office equipment, and the place I worked for charged $40-$50 an hour - I was paid $7.50 per hour by the company.

[ForeverAutumn]

Yeah, about 15 years ago I used to repair photocopier machines, faxes, telephones, you know...office equipment, and the place I worked for charged $40-$50 an hour - I was paid $7.50 per hour by the company.

It sounds like you could have benefitted from a union.

BWAAAAHAAAAHAAAAAA!

[Feanor]

It sounds like you could have benefitted from a union.

BWAAAAHAAAAHAAAAAA!

But I'm in an industry that never had any "threat" of unionization. That is to say, the private, white-collar financial industry. How come? Well, virtually all workers are salaried, not hourly wage earners -- and historically a very high proportion of workers have been women.

As we can observe, unionized industries sometimes enjoy a fairer split of the profits between shareholders and workers, but they usually aren't any better than the rest in terms of efficiency or overall impact on economic system. We need look no farther than the NA auto industry to figure that out.

[ForeverAutumn]

An interesting editorial from the Financial Post. For my American friends, the Financial Post is one of Canada's daily national business newspapers.

Bailouts have time and place
Nations were built with them, now some must help others out

Diane Francis, Financial Post
Published: Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Automakers have upped their bailout request to Ottawa and Queen's Park, and these governments have no choice but to pony up.

Tough talk from ideologues, rivals or other provincial governments is irrelevant and unhelpful. Canada's auto and auto-parts sector is an essential and important high-tech industry, employer and exporter.

Governments will recoup much of their investment in the form of taxes, fees and interest payments. This is nothing new. In some cases, such as Syncrude or Hibernia years ago, governments took pieces of the action and benefited by doing so.

It is unfair to characterize this as a bailout of high-wage workers or poor managements. It is a needed infusion to shore up the country's current-accounts balance and tax base, as well as help to save suppliers such as transport companies, parts manufacturers and steel companies.

It is not needed because auto-makers are lousy and make poor products. They have operated for decades and have been, like the rest of us, mugged by a combination of former U. S. Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan's loose monetary policies and the gang on Wall Street.

By the way, bailouts have helped build Canada. Some efforts have failed, but successes include the oil-sands industry, offshore Hibernia and industries such as Canadian National Railway and the railway that built the country, Canadian Pacific.

Other subsidies, such as homesteading, government contracts and tax breaks, have also built Canada. The same mixed-economy approach has taken place in countries like ours that have been too small, too foreign-dominated, too remote or too inefficient to compete globally.

The Americans are learning that the proper role of government is often as the lender or investor of last resort. Public-sector bashing is a favourite sport among Americans, but most should realize that everything from vaccines to aviation and the Internet were financed by government.

My guess is this mess will take a few years to turn around and get worse before it gets better.

The world's financial system, its blood supply, is still frozen and will, at the end of the day, be largely nationalized. Even if Canada escapes this fate, due to its slightly stronger banks, Ottawa will likely and shortly find itself asked to help bail out banks elsewhere.

Indications are that sovereign nations such as Greece, Belgium and even Switzerland are simply too small to take over and fix their banking systems. New York economist Noriel Roubini even speculated that Britain may need a bailout for its banks.

This could mean multilateral bailouts, which Canada will have to help mount.

All of this is very worrisome, but hardly surprising: governments becoming soft receivers in this Mother of Bankruptcies.

In the end, a fix will be found because, quite simply, it must be. No amount of debate about the role of government from an ideological viewpoint, or blame-laying against governments, will change the reality that the financial players totally blew it with their recklessness and, in some cases, their criminality.

dfrancis@nationalpost.com - Blog: financialpost.com/dianefrancis

[kexodusc]

Interesting viewpoint.

[topspeed]

I just read that the auto bailout approved by Bush before he left office included a stipulation that the union's bring their labor costs in-line with right-to-work factories.

Whether or not it remains part of the package with the Obama administration will be interesting to watch. If Obama is going to help the Big 3 return to the black, one of the first things he should consider is pushing the new CAFE standard of 35mpg back a few years. To reach an average of 35mpg is going to require a huge investment, a sum of money that auto manufacturers simply do not have. As of this date, only Honda is scheduled to post an operating profit for 2008, and even then they are still pulling out of F1 racing and have cancelled numerous projects including the NSX sports car. Every other manufacturer is expected to post a loss. I'm not saying we shouldn't have more economical and earth friendly vehicles. The timing is just wrong.

[nightflier]

I'm not saying we shouldn't have more economical and earth friendly vehicles. The timing is just wrong.

I guess someone forgot to watch The Inconvenient Truth. As much as I don't like listening to Gore and thought the politics every five minutes were a bit over the top, the fact is that there is a tipping point with the environment that we can't postpone. Even if we continue to act completely selfishly like we've done for the past 8 years, and care nothing for the environment, what we do to the rest of the world in the process is going to hurt us more than we realize. The changes we need to make are going to be economically painful for everyone, but this is a pin-prick compared to the devastation we'll suffer if we continue as before. The simple fact is that the American auto industry depended on continued growth in this sector and this is simply not sustainable.

We Americans need to change our individualistic thinking about transportation and start thinking in a cooperative way about sharing the resource. We need to start thinking like the Europeans and Japanese: only one car per family, public transportation that is free for the disabled/military/youth/elderly, more incentives for bicycles, better work-at-home options (incl. upgrading the Internet), and living closer to where we work. I know this will be dismissed as socialist and impossible, but it's going to happen whether we like it of not. The alternative would be far worse. Retracting our consumption to one car maker is only the beginning, we might even loose all three because of our oafish ways in the past.

Time to spin up Red Barchetta, and pay attention to the lyrics because that may very well be our future.

[ForeverAutumn]

I guess someone forgot to watch The Inconvenient Truth. As much as I don't like listening to Gore and thought the politics every five minutes were a bit over the top, the fact is that there is a tipping point with the environment that we can't postpone. Even if we continue to act completely selfishly like we've done for the past 8 years, and care nothing for the environment, what we do to the rest of the world in the process is going to hurt us more than we realize.

In my uneducated (on this topic) opinion...HOGWASH!

What the rest of the world is (or as the case may be isn't) doing is hurting us far more that we're hurting them. We have much stricter polution guidelines in North America than in, probably, anywhere else in the world.

[JSE]

I guess someone forgot to watch The Inconvenient Truth. As much as I don't like listening to Gore and thought the politics every five minutes were a bit over the top, the fact is that there is a tipping point with the environment that we can't postpone. Even if we continue to act completely selfishly like we've done for the past 8 years, and care nothing for the environment, what we do to the rest of the world in the process is going to hurt us more than we realize. The changes we need to make are going to be economically painful for everyone, but this is a pin-prick compared to the devastation we'll suffer if we continue as before. The simple fact is that the American auto industry depended on continued growth in this sector and this is simply not sustainable.

I'll second FA on this one. Yes we need more energy efficient and environmentally friendly vehicles but it has to be done over time. It's simply not an instant fix. If we just "flip the switch" we will have many other problems to deal with.

We Americans need to change our individualistic thinking about transportation and start thinking in a cooperative way about sharing the resource. We need to start thinking like the Europeans and Japanese: only one car per family, public transportation that is free for the disabled/military/youth/elderly, more incentives for bicycles, better work-at-home options (incl. upgrading the Internet), and living closer to where we work. I know this will be dismissed as socialist and impossible, but it's going to happen whether we like it of not. The alternative would be far worse. Retracting our consumption to one car maker is only the beginning, we might even loose all three because of our oafish ways in the past.

Nice thought but it's just not feasable. Public transporation can only do so much. I can't use public transporation to get to work. I could get about 6 miles from my office but I really don't want to walk 12 miles per day in the Texas heat. Riding a bike? In Houston? I guess that would lower my carbon footprint because I would be killed within a week or so. One car? Wife and I work in completely different directions and Public Transportation will not work for her either. Living Closer to work? The wife's or my work? Any reduction in distance by one of us will be offset by the other's increased distance. Work from home? Maybe but my company does not offer it right now.

In regard to both of quoted paragraphs above, it's nice to think big and have grand thoughts but unfortunately reality has to set in at some point. Things take time and have to be done in a way that limits the negative impact on the lives and financial wellfare of people.

[nightflier]

JSE, it's encouraging you're thinking about all the options, I hope more people do. No, it's not going to be a flip of the switch, but the party is certainly over. Public transportation has to be improved considerably, your company needs to be given incentives to encourage you to work from home, and bicycle riding may not be convenient in Houston in the summer, but on a nice Spring day, I'm sure it's feasible. And one day, you will live closer to your work, it's only a matter of time.

Here's some encouraging suggestions/thoughts:

- Why can't our car manufacturers gradually change from making SUVs and sports cars to making more buses, trains, and trams as well as energy efficient vehicles?

- If a bicycle is out of the question, how about a motorized low-carbon-footprint bike, maybe even an electric one you can charge at work? It's only 12 miles. Then there's Segways, some even come with a cover for the rain. Maybe Ford and GM should make these too?

- Free public transportation for younger people (students, mostly) is a great way to create a culture in the next generation that won't mind riding the bus. Free public transportation for the elderly, disabled, and veterans should be included from a moral/ethical standpoint - besides, it will help them get to work less expensively, too.

- With more demand for public transportation, more bicycles, scooters, buses, trains, and trams will appear. The reason we don't have it now is because we've allowed the demand to diminish.

- Maybe once we take a seat next to the people who clean our homes and tend to our yards, we'll gain some respect for their choices or lack thereof.

But the one thing we can't do is allow our current depression about our economy and our industry to paralyze us and keep us from doing anything. Just because these changes seem so great doesn't mean we shouldn't start making them a little at a time. Unfortunately, the American auto industry will suffer major changes very fast, no matter what we do. It's already happening and will continue to happen until supply once again is in line with demand.

We've just been ignoring these facts so much that the rest of the world has passed us by. That doesn't mean we can't catch up, but we better start doing it right away. The head-in-the-sand mentality we witnessed in the last 8 years just won't save us. We have to start somewhere. And since this is an audio forum, maybe the one place we can all start is by choosing a less expensive amp the next time around, or barring that, postponing that "next time" a little while. Every little bit counts if enough people participate.

FA,

The movie isn't considered hogwash by most folks around the globe. Actually, the evidence presented isn't really being questioned by the scientific community. The carbon footprint of the average American, and to a lesser extent the average Canadian, is so ridiculously overwhelming that the European and Asian countries are pretty much letting us simmer in our own stupidity and moving forward with research, incentives, and industrial progress. There may be some predictions that could be up for debate (after all, no one knows the future), but the statistics are pretty spot on. Actually, many green NGOs consider the movie very conservative on some of these predictions. It is Al Gore, after all.

I think that if I lived in Florida right now, I'd probably be making plans to move to a safer state. Ironically Canada will likely get increasingly dryer as these trends continue, and that should concern every Canadian. I doubt most of them consider the movie hogwash, but I only know a few so maybe you can correct me. But to suggest that the rest of the world should carry the lion's share of the blame is completely out of line with the evidence. I doubt there's anyone who would support such a position.

Well, there's always Pix, of course....

[JSE]

JSE, it's encouraging you're thinking about all the options, I hope more people do. No, it's not going to be a flip of the switch, but the party is certainly over. Public transportation has to be improved considerably, your company needs to be given incentives to encourage you to work from home, and bicycle riding may not be convenient in Houston in the summer, but on a nice Spring day, I'm sure it's feasible. And one day, you will live closer to your work, it's only a matter of time.

Here's some encouraging suggestions/thoughts:

- Why can't our car manufacturers gradually change from making SUVs and sports cars to making more buses, trains, and trams as well as energy efficient vehicles?

- If a bicycle is out of the question, how about a motorized low-carbon-footprint bike, maybe even an electric one you can charge at work? It's only 12 miles. Then there's Segways, some even come with a cover for the rain. Maybe Ford and GM should make these too?

- Free public transportation for younger people (students, mostly) is a great way to create a culture in the next generation that won't mind riding the bus. Free public transportation for the elderly, disabled, and veterans should be included from a moral/ethical standpoint - besides, it will help them get to work less expensively, too.

- With more demand for public transportation, more bicycles, scooters, buses, trains, and trams will appear. The reason we don't have it now is because we've allowed the demand to diminish.

- Maybe once we take a seat next to the people who clean our homes and tend to our yards, we'll gain some respect for their choices or lack thereof.

But the one thing we can't do is allow our current depression about our economy and our industry to paralyze us and keep us from doing anything. Just because these changes seem so great doesn't mean we shouldn't start making them a little at a time. Unfortunately, the American auto industry will suffer major changes very fast, no matter what we do. It's already happening and will continue to happen until supply once again is in line with demand.

We've just been ignoring these facts so much that the rest of the world has passed us by. That doesn't mean we can't catch up, but we better start doing it right away. The head-in-the-sand mentality we witnessed in the last 8 years just won't save us. We have to start somewhere. And since this is an audio forum, maybe the one place we can all start is by choosing a less expensive amp the next time around, or barring that, postponing that "next time" a little while. Every little bit counts if enough people participate.

Public Transportation is just not feasable everywhere. Take my city Houston for example. Houston is a huge sprawling city. There is just no way it could be serviced properly or effectively by Public Transportation for a majority of residents. There are only 24 hours in a day and I don't want to spend 12 of them riding on a bus or train trying to get from one part of the city to the other. In more compact cities like Chicago and New York Pucblic transportaion works great. Not so much in places like LA, Houston, Dallas, etc.

Plus increasing the number of buses and trains will also cause greater pollution. There are environmental costs to using more energy. Electic trains and busses may not pollute directly, but they sure as hell do indirectly. The Toyota Pruis Hybrid is a excellent example. Sure, it has lower emissions and has greater MPG but the environmental costs associated with the production of this car far outweigh it's benefit. True environmentalists should be boycotting this vehicle!

[kexodusc]

I agree with Nightflier on this one - better, modern, integrated public transportation is doable, saves the taxpayer money over time and is part of the solution going forward. I'm not talking the crappy bus systems a lot of North American cities have. It's not going to happen over night though and a radical move any direction is likely to fail.

As for the green track record of North America, we're not nearly as great as we make ourselves out to be. Last year Yale published a "100 Greenest Countries Report" and Canada finished a modest 12th, while the US finished 39th. A bit dirtier than Georgia and Argentina, but not quite as dirty as Taiwan and Cuba. Definitely considerable room for improvement. I would think any nation with the wealth of those two countries could at least be top 10.

Auto companies would be smart looking for public transportation opportunities. Building and maintaining tram style systems can be a lucrative business as well. Car sales are eventually going to plateau if they haven't already, and growth is going to require new business ideas. Gonna be hard to do when you're fighting off bankruptcy though. One thing at a time.

[JSE]

FA,

The movie isn't considered hogwash by most folks around the globe. Actually, the evidence presented isn't really being questioned by the scientific community. The carbon footprint of the average American, and to a lesser extent the average Canadian, is so ridiculously overwhelming that the European and Asian countries are pretty much letting us simmer in our own stupidity and moving forward with research, incentives, and industrial progress. There may be some predictions that could be up for debate (after all, no one knows the future), but the statistics are pretty spot on. Actually, many green NGOs consider the movie very conservative on some of these predictions. It is Al Gore, after all.

I think that if I lived in Florida right now, I'd probably be making plans to move to a safer state. Ironically Canada will likely get increasingly dryer as these trends continue, and that should concern every Canadian. I doubt most of them consider the movie hogwash, but I only know a few so maybe you can correct me. But to suggest that the rest of the world should carry the lion's share of the blame is completely out of line with the evidence.

You really need to expand your reading. There are many scientists who disagree and question the evidence put forth in the movie. Whether you choose to read about the scientist or give their arguments any credibility is up to you.

Also, the rest of world does need to step up and take their share of the blame. China is probably one of the worst polliters in our world's lifetime. Might want to look at this "evidence" you keep referring to again.

I doubt there's anyone who would support such a position.

Anyone? You and the people who have authored the articles you are reading are not "everyone". Many common people and scientist do support such a position.