Wagoner asks Obama for more R&D funding

By HECTOR #1, Posted: 6/26/2008

Just the headline makes me want to vomit.

Here we have the CEO of a company very much on the decline going to the man who COULD be the next president asking for MY (and YOUR) money so that his company can spend it.

Are you F***ing kidding me?! Since when is it the role of the government to provide R&D founding to private companies? Absolutely disgusting.

Then we have our savior Obama who thinks everyone is as stupid as the Gore crowd who believes in global warmism proposing a $150 billion *green energy fund*. The only green will be the color of MY dollars going to line the pockets of some people who will take advantage of this folly. And McCain is not a lot better.

Well, I guess if we survived Jimmy Carter we'll survive one of these two mongos.

By Darren23 #2, Posted: 6/26/2008

The U.S. wouldnt be the first country to spend money on supporting its local industries. You got to remember, if GM goes then a whole bunch of support companies like suppliers and financing firms go..then you have hundrends of thousands of jobless people overnight.

I know in a freely working economy those people would be directed to more efficient industries or get new skills or what not.. but at the end of the day NO ONE looks seriously at the long term - especially American voters.

It's not always so easy to make the hard decision - even if they're the right one.

By Mike #3, Posted: 6/27/2008

What do Jaguar, Fiat, BMW, Mazda, Nissan, Mercedes, VW, Chrysler, Proton, Rover, Toyota, etc etc... all have in common? They were bailed out by special trade deals, government sponsored bank bailouts, and in many cases given direct government funding.

All of these companies competed and lost... but none were allowed to go bankrupt when their day came. So, should the US try to lead the world into "free trade" by allowing our auto industry to die while others get bailed out? Would any other country be so foolish? Of course not.

The American auto industry is a key economic asset. There is no reason for Americans not to reset the industry via bankruptcy court, give it new capital infusion, and new private leadership... if needed. Only American Conservatives would let huge segments of the US economy die in the name of Ivy League ideology. You can't eat ideology, but a course corrected US auto industry can feed 2 million Americans annually... at a profit. I am happy that Obama is getting an early look into the issue.

By HECTOR #4, Posted: 6/27/2008

I am one of those *American conservatives* Mike who would allow GM to die, at least in its current form. And I went to school vey far away from any Ivy League campus which are, incidentally, known bastions of liberalism, not conservatism.

Let's remember the Chrysler bail out and let's see where that company finds itself today. A company that should have died a long time ago was allowed to continue making crappy products only to go down the drain again. I am not an Ayn Rand follower (pure and unadulterated capitalism rules) but I don't believe for a second giving the likes of Rick Wagoner and Bob LUtz public money will do any good.

If GM wasn't able to correctly manage THEIR money, what makes you think they will know how to manage MINE?

By chris #5, Posted: 6/27/2008

you're right hector, all these other companies all around the world are doing just fine so why should the american companies get help from their home governments? because if you think those other companies did it on their own, the germans and the japanese in particular, you're dead wrong. toyota has admitted that 40% of the direct funding for the hybrid synergy drive came from the government.

Like i've said before hector, government is a business. they have to invest their money in their own country. a good government will invest their money where the entire country gets the most social and economical benefit. people who have jobs are too busy to go commit crimes. people who are making money for themselves are making money for the government. If your reasoning for such a hard stance on the matter is because of crappy products, I think the record will show that those days are over, and the american brands are making very good products that really do compete with the foreign marques. if your problem is with the amount of jobs that the american brands have moved out of the country, well they still have a higher percentage of domestic employees than any other foreign brand. taking a hard stance on them won't make matters any better.

do you beat the delinquent child or do you reward him for good behaviour, when good behaviour arises? one of the best things my parents ever did for me was offer me some decent money for every A i got in school.

By Renton #6, Posted: 6/27/2008

They had every opportunity for the last 20 years to build more efficient products, instead they merely watched the bottom line as they force fed us ginormous body-on-frame SUVs.

Now they want gov't money to WASTE on R&D.

GM you are a loser. I have watched your company make mistake after mistake. Wasn't the continued loss of market share year after year after year to the Japs and Europeans a farking hint that you were doing it wrong?

God you make me sick.

By Paul #7, Posted: 6/27/2008

Those ginormous SUV's were being sold at record paces. Why wouldn't the big three build the highest profit margin vehicle that people would buy. GM didn't force feed. But I agree that they fell asleep at the wheel when it came to sedans and small cars.

IGM et al didn't prepare for market changes while making money, and I don't want to hand out money either. But don't underestimate the fleeting desires of the American public. When gas prices hit 3 dollars only 15 months ago, SUV sales sunk. Then gas came back down to 2.80 and all of a sudden the 0% financing looked great and SUV sales ran back up.

BTW the price of a barrel of oil has doubled in Europe but quadrupled in US in the same time period because of the eroded value of the dollar. So who is to blame for that?

By mark #8, Posted: 8/22/2008

To Renton (and Hector) - "they had every opportunity to build more efficient products,instead they merely watched the bottom line as they force fed us ginormous body-on-frame SUVs." "MERELY" watched the bottom line?!? That is waht they are supposed do!
No one forced fed the consumer SUVs. The consumer wanted SUVs and the domestic industry defended their market position on these profitable products by investing in the. Strange how you do not rail against Toyota for moving aggressively into LARGE SUVs (new Tundra and Landcruiser) and Nissan for the ARMADA. If the price of oil had not been manipulated and gas was still under $3.00 the product plans would still be in place. Both GM and Ford have outstanding and efficient products in Europe - why, because that is waht the market demands. Ford is aggresively moving those products to the US.
Your comments reveal little understanding of the industry or free markets.
Additionally, Japanese and European car companies do not pay for the health care costs of their employees as domestic makers do, releiving a huge legacy cots. Not really a level playing field, is it? Our government should help make our industry more competitive or stop imports from countries financing their industry.

by Bob #9, Posted: 4/8/2009

Yes, GM wants more money for R&D. I have in my possession a letter from Rick Wagoner telling me and my company no thanks in response to my letter to him about our motor that requires no fuel and no emissions. I am glad to see the man go. There are those willing to work and those that just want to preserve a paycheck. I think we now know which one Rick is.