President Obama plans to drop the "Car Czar"
(H/t Heather at VideoCafe)
Obama sure faces a tremendous amount of problems upon taking the oath of office.
President Obama has dropped the idea of appointing a single, powerful “car czar” to oversee the revamping of General Motors and Chrysler and will instead keep the politically delicate task in the hands of his most senior economic advisers, a top administration official said Sunday night.
Mr. Obama is designating the Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, and the chairman of the National Economic Council, Lawrence H. Summers, to oversee a presidential panel on the auto industry. Mr. Geithner will also supervise the $17.4 billion in loan agreements already in place with G.M. and Chrysler, said the official, who insisted on anonymity.
The official also said that Ron Bloom, a restructuring expert who has advised the labor unions in the troubled steel and airline industries, would be named a senior adviser to Treasury on the auto crisis. The unexpected shift comes as G.M. and Chrysler race to complete broad restructuring plans they must file with the Treasury by Tuesday. The companies’ plans are required to show progress in cutting long-term costs as a condition for keeping their loans.
On FNS, Chris Wallace tried to smear the UAW by bringing up stalled negotiations by the union and the automakers as a way to paint them as selfish. The usual Republican anti union line. David Axlerod wouldn't comment on the negotiations, but did say a restructuring of the entire auto industry is needed and not just by the auto workers.
Wallace: How do you view that the UAW talks collapsed?
Axelrod: Well, obviously this is a difficult situation and everyone's going to have to continue to work toward a solution. We're going to wait and see what the Automakers have to say on Tuesday and go from there.
How interesting since the negotiations aren't dead in the water after all.
On Sunday afternoon, G.M. and the U.A.W. resumed discussions in Detroit about reducing the company’s labor costs, a person with direct knowledge of the talks said. This person, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions are private, characterized the talks Sunday evening as “intense” but did not indicate that an agreement was imminent. The U.A.W. had walked away from the bargaining table late Friday as the two sides clashed over how to cover retiree health care costs.
I'm sure the Richard Shelby's of Congress will be getting a ton of media attention very soon as the auto industry problems heat up again. Michael Steele is probably looking at a fresh set of resumes for make-up people as my keyboard types these words.
Are the company executives going to take a pay cut or just the UAW workers, i.e., the people who actually produce the cars?
woodguy
I remember 1974!!! Gas prices jump and Detroit cranks out more
battleships. Toyota, Honda and Nissan save the day with subcompacts.
Thirty five years later and the 2009 Suburban is on the Billboard
outside my house. As Carlin said.....
Bottom line' neither side of this debate is for making the cars we need for
this century. As much as unions have done for working people, both
sides need to break out of the box.
was wisdom. If you think military base closings were a contentious issue wait until rationalizing the automotive business gets down to plant closings. Do you guys have an interstate warfare act? This is one issue on which politicians should stay clear.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
this defines the term
Bankruptcy laws is this country are written for and by the Fat Cats enabling them to:
The Used to be Big three are now encumbered by
Obama needs to
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
The prescription you have offered is virtually identical to the one offered by the chief economist of the IMF last week.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Link?
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
I can't find it online. You'll have to see last weeks guest editorial in The Economist.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory...
if so, i am confused where it mirrors what alice wrote...
and, on a different note, this op-ed prescribes going back to a reliance on overconsumption--the only question arises is how to get people consuming again. it is a recipe for disaster. ah yes, no wonder, it is the IMF.
It wasn't the guest editorial although some of Blanchard's prescription is included in this editorial. I don't see where he's advising stimulation to over-consumption but some stimulus to consumption is required to head off deflation. Basically he's arguing that all steps necessary to restore integrity and hence confidence to both financial systems and consumers should be taken. This is pure Keynes. I'm looking for the IMF reference to US health care but I get a mailed subscription so bear with me.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
:)
anyhoo, yes, there is a pinch of keynes thrown in, with the mention of state spending. true. but, there are several hefty spoonfuls of a reliance on consumer spending to get the economy back on its feet. and that is wrongheaded.
reading this piece (quickly, mind you [which is no excuse]) it left me with the impression that his argument is that if consumers would just get out there and spend some dough we could get our economic machine running again. and my question to him would be: with what money? certainly he wouldn't prescribe using credit, would he?
not. Too many maxed credit cards already.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Wow! You must have ESP.
Do you know where Al Franken is? Minnesota is short one.
If I were a psychopath, I would join the republican party, and get in on the gravy train taking the Teabircher morons to the cleaners.
Thats an expense the big three will want to see gone.
I'm still waiting for some of these smartass executives to clue in to the fact that, if they started advocating single payer health care, and actually GOT it, it would not only lower their corporate expenses. It would also stop them from having to pull the Chapter 11 bankruptcy laws out of their ass every other year as a method of getting out of their health care obligations. These people are definitely not as smart as they think they are.
It the position was called a Bus Czar, we could say Obama put the Bus Czar under the bus.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Features Republican debate on economy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obxPNVU15k0
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
http://www.kreml.ru/en/main/collection/museum...
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
saw the film FUEL yesterday
www.thefuelfilm.com
Diesel is the answer to eliminating our dependency on foreign oil - not petro diesel - bio diesel - amazing amazing amazing
please see this film
and get involved to make a difference
change your fuel
change the world!
z
If you would rather drive than eat, then go ahead with bio-diesel on a world wide scale.
That "taking away from food stock" argument has been debunked many times. The problem with food is inadequate distribution and corrupt politicos, not biofuels. Ethanol, for example, is made with field corn which is not consumed by humans. No one has ever starved to death because of biofuels.
"We will find fulfillment not in the goods that we have, but in the good we can do for each other."
Robert F. Kennedy
does it lead to price increases in grain production?
It is you who are wrong. At least as far as ethanol is concerned, converting food to fuel makes very poor economic sense although it is very popular with agricultural states. Whether bio-diesel suffers from the same fate rests on the costs of the inputs. There is yet more development to do so we'll have to see how that plays out.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Please offer proof that ethanol makes "poor economic sense." When oil was at its peak price earlier, ethanol actually helped to hold down the price by increasing the available supply. I live in the midwest and the economic benefits are certainly substantial regionally and nationally as well. Do understand that using corn and beans for biofuels is a temporary measure until other even more cost effective methods under development are brought on line in a bigger scale way.
Read this for more information and stop believing the propaganda of the oil companies and API:
www.ethanol.org/index.php?id=83&parentid=25
Or better yet, go up to Prince William Sound in Alaska and ask the residents there how ethanol has damaged their economy and way of life. They could only wish it had instead of the Exxon Valdez.
"We will find fulfillment not in the goods that we have, but in the good we can do for each other."
Robert F. Kennedy
I don't know what's in the movie FUEL, but I used to be in the biofuel business, and this argument is a little off topic.
1. STARCH ethanol, from corn, potatoes, etc,, would indeed compete with food production, not to mention the fact that it's (E80 that is) more expensive than regular gasoline to make, and creates a bigger carbon footprint.
2. CELLULOSE ethanol (not quite ready for prime time) will not compete with food (as much), because it's made from agricultural waste products like straw, sawdust etc. (I say "as much" because cattle eat straw, etc.)
3. Both starch ethanol and cellulose ethanol are red herrings. What we need to do is start making METHANOL from SEWAGE! At the moment, every large city has a sewage treatment plant that's running at a loss. Methane can be recovered from that sewage, and either burned directly as a gas, or converted to methanol, and put into biodiesel, and actually turn a loss into a profit.
You know, the hog farms in Arkansas have a TERRIBLE problem of what to do with all the pig sh!t? They just let it sit in giant pools of sewage that stink up the whole state. Imagine all of that stuff being converted into methane/methanol biodiesel!
grows places where crops dont.
Seaweed can be converted into cellulose ethanol, and can be harvested from the continental shelf.
I have run varying degrees of biodiesel, including 100% in my 86 Benz (215,000 miles, considered low mileage for that model)for nearly 3 years with no problem. I get 28-30 MPG highway and 24 city from a 23 year old car. The ecological benefits of biodiesel are also substantial, it helps reduce our carbon foot print on this planet versus oil. And who wants to buy anything from those gougers and assholes at Exxon/Mobil, et al anyway?
MB has the 320 CDI Bluetec (38MPG highway) and BMW the 335d (same MPG) available today. They get very similar performance to the gassers (with more torque) and last twice as long as gassers with proper maintenance. MB will also have a diesel/hybrid S class next year that gets 40MPG. Diesels are widespread in Europe where their virtues are well known.
And Detroit? They use diesels in gargantuan gas hogs like Dodge Ram pickups, etc. That's swell if you want to channel driving a Kenworth. Nobody in the big three has any serious plan to put a diesel in a passenger car even though people like GM have production ready diesel engines now. They could do it but just don't.
And you wonder why these saps are going to the bottom?
"We will find fulfillment not in the goods that we have, but in the good we can do for each other."
Robert F. Kennedy
he was ready and waiting for the Inaugural parade.
http://www.mohawkdave.com/172.22.134.100/pict...
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
Come up with something germane, will you please.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Is Russia close enough to Germane? After all it was you who got me thinking about vehicles with your proposal for insurance re-employment.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/newsholme/193...
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
That looks like honest work to me.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
happy and fulfilled.
P.S. The group in the bottom of the photo is discussing their health care plans! Krush the kulaks!
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
the working class has the unions as their version of too big to fail. the corporation identity does NOT like unions and/or labor costs. i firmly believe many corporations/businesses would prefer NO unions and NO ability for the worker/laborer to negotiate. i have some sympathy for the workers but i have NO concern for the auto companies especially GM. they could have done more to strengthen the demand for the EV-1 vehicle. instead GM wanted the largest profit margin and went with the hummer. the BUSH administration didn't improve matters as they provided nice tax cut incentives for people purchasing SUV's. instead toyota is way ahead of the pack as far as the hybrid vehicle/higher mileage vehicles.
the US govt has been hell bent on destroying collective bargaining for decades... how do you figure that unions are the working class version of "too big to fail"? not sure what you are getting at...
and it is no mystery: corporate america hates unions. and the IMF has been able to take that hatred on the road with their economic blackmail (see, structural adjustments) and advocate union busting.
my father is in a union as an engineer for boeing. the union is the working class version of too big to fail. the best version they have to negotiate. power in numbers otherwise as alicex chom says they would have people work for nothing. actually that's why there has been more "cheap labor" to further destroy/undercut the union labor. corporations hate labor cost. automation will continue to take over many jobs. what some people forget is that manufacturing years ago was very hard on the human body creating a population of workers with ongoing/difficult to treat medical conditions. this was part of the rising costs of healthCare. the unions were very concerned about the conditions they were seeing amongst the workers. many of these conditions were/are neuromusculoskeletal like repetitive injuries which have had inferior treatment for many years.
i see what you mean now....
I firmly believe that most corporations would prefer that their workers worked for NOTHING.
The Republican Congress of 1947 created the NSA, the CIA, the MIC, the National Security Act leading to the National Security State which Truman signed. And the Cold War which we suffered from for forty years.
They also created the Taft Harley Act over Truman's veto.
It was called the slave labor act at the time.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
We don't need anyone in our government called "Czar."
No Drug Czar, Terror Czar, Intelligence Czar, or anything Czar.
It's just creepy. Stop it.
how could you say such a thing? the czar-record has been astounding thus far. drug war: won. terror war: won.
/snark off
all the use of the word 'czar' for anything. So damned stupid. I guess politicians haven't figured out yet that the US isn't doing all that great anymore.
This is not about us it is about them.....
Lets face the truth of what Tim is going to do and what our corporate government's objectives are...
They want the citizens of this country to except the burden of putting the financial burden of this country and that of foreign countries on a credit card for our grandchildren and their grandchildren to give an never ending funds to the Financial institutions of the "WORLD" .
This will give then to funds to gain control of a Global world dominates of wealth of this country and the world...
This has nothing to do with the protection of our citizens , but to ensure that the criminal financial institutions have their a..es covered and supported for their criminal actions in the past and future... The financial Ceo's along with Bush's criminal administration should be investigated and sentenced (if guilty Ha
None
that "burden" that was handed to him by former treasury secretary h. paulson(former goldman sachs ceo).
little timmeh geithner is by no means an innocent bystander. he is one of the burden-makers. thanks little timmeh!
there's some chatter that GM may partner with fiat. this strategy may help them survive.
History repeats, over and over again.
GM, top heavy and unfit to design and manufacture their own products to the American public.
There could be no better investment in America than to invest in America becoming energy independent! We need to utilize everything in out power to reduce our dependence on foreign oil including using our own natural resources. Create cheap clean energy, new badly needed green jobs, and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. The high cost of fuel this past year seriously damaged our economy and society. The cost of fuel effects every facet of consumer goods from production to shipping costs. After a brief reprieve gas is inching back up. OPEC will continue to cut production until they achieve their desired 80-100. per barrel. If all gasoline cars, trucks, and SUV's instead had plug-in electric drive trains, the amount of electricity needed to replace gasoline is about equal to the estimated wind energy potential of the state of North Dakota. There is a really good new book out by Jeff Wilson called The Manhattan Project of 2009 Energy Independence Now. http://www.themanhattanprojectof2009.com
Are Americans so devoid of common world history knowledge as to be unaware of the connotations (mostly negative) of the term Czar?
Second, is it so hard to actually form a panel of experts which can a) help define and fully identify the problem, and b) propose a rational course of action?
Or is common sense too much to ask?
not too much to ask, but it is close to the edge.
And I believe Americans know enough about royalty to prefver Czars to other types.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
wrong on both counts. Americans are among the least elucidated of the world's people.
With all the internet dating services available I don't know why it would elude Americans.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
to be expected, with all things Russian and/or soviet, from top heavy inefficient orgs and making/selling lackluster products.
If the combined cost of labor is only 10% of the cost of a vehicle, then why is the union negotiating wages and benefits?
I absolutely resist the loss of benefits to workers. After all, it is the circulated resources of the workers that drives our economy.
Comments are closed on this entry