Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
MAKING GM GREEN.
Speaking of GM and bailouts, some guy named Barack Obama took to the pages of The American Prospect awhile back to propose a deal:
There is now no doubt that cars that use less oil represent the future of the auto industry. If U.S. car companies hope to be a part of that future -- if they hope to survive -- they must start building more of these cars. And we must help them do it.He goes on to make some misguided -- but politically useful -- claims in favor of ethanol and flex-fuels, but the basic idea is sound, and it would be insane for the government to offer a loan that didn't require some significant reforms on the part of GM. Transitioning the country away from fossil fuels will be a decades-long project and won't happen all in one bill. Rather, it's got to be a pervasive goal present in lots of discrete pieces of legislation, and that means taking advantage of possible opportunities like this one. If we're going to spend tens of billions to subsidize GM, we may as well spend enough money to put them on the cutting edge of green demand and bring them into line with our national priorities.Right now, one of the biggest costs facing auto manufacturers is health care. Last year, retiree health care alone cost the Big 3 automakers nearly $6.7 billion. No wonder they're having trouble finding the money to invest in fuel-efficient cars.
I believe we should make a deal with the auto companies to solve this problem. Legislation I've introduced called “Health Care for Hybrids” would allow the federal government to pick up part of the tab for the automakers' retiree health-care costs. In exchange, the companies would use some of that savings to build and invest in more fuel-efficient cars. It's a win-win proposal: Their retirees will be taken care of, they'll save dramatically on health costs, and they'll be free to invest in the fuel-efficient cars that are key to their competitive future.
COMMENTS (6)
so we should expect the government to hold to the same principles as the financial bailout and simply give the money away and hide all the transactions and have no accountability.
Posted by: TGP | November 11, 2008 2:46 PM
Obama's out of the loop regarding GM health care. Retirees no longer get any GM support for their Medicare/Drug supplement premiums (I have a Bro-in-Law retired from GM, and they just purchased their Blue Cross coverage for next year). And GM makes no current contributions to existing retiree pensions - those were sold off to Fidelity a number of years ago.
So, if Detroit has health care costs it for current employees, and I'm sure that's a big number.
Obama would have to convince mgmt and unions to take over the working employee health care to reduce the cost/car for healthcare, which I would be happy to have the taxpayer do under some single-payer (government) plan. But NO paying premiums to health care insurance companies. This could become the core of a single-payer option for all workers in big/small biz.
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | November 11, 2008 4:14 PM
Why pick up part of the tab for healthcare? Why not just take care of health care for all GM, Ford and Chrysler employees and retirees -- roll them into the VA system, in exchange for the hybrid stuff. Do the same for all of AIG's employees, while you're at it.
Any other companies that get bailed out can do the same. Eventually, you rename the VA to the Federal Healthcare Administration and roll Medicaid, Medicare into it. At some point, the snowball gets so big that you effectively have socialized medicine -- YAY!
Posted by: socialist pig | November 11, 2008 8:18 PM
Lending $25 billion to GM and Ford is stupid, when we can buy GM, Ford, and Chrysler for about $6 billion - and then we wouldn't have to negotiate anything with them: we'd just do it.
As of this morning, the combined market cap of Ford and GM was just under $5.8 billion, and (privately owned) Chrysler's generally conceded to be worthless. So there's nothing unrealistic about this.
Posted by: low-tech cyclist | November 12, 2008 9:53 AM
So how do you deal with the three areas that killing the big three: legacy costs that make it more expensive to manufacture, over capacity that you can't change because it is next to impossible to close plants, cut labor, and reduce product lines, and a world-wide recession that is causing people to purchase fewer cars (not just big 2 1/4 made cars, any cars)?
What is it we'd "do" if we just bought GM, Ford, and Chrysler? Do "we" really want to get into the car business?
Posted by: m - dos | November 13, 2008 8:42 AM
It recommended sterility technologies / energy savings and buffer crops be used to prevent cross-pollination between GM and non-GM crops
Posted by: khooper | December 18, 2008 10:01 PM