Why?

Why do we still have to read articles that state "The real problem is that many people don’t want to buy the cars that Detroit makes" when last year GM sold more cars and trucks worldwide than any other car maker? They managed to do this with less workers than Toyota, Nissan, and Volkswagen. GM's Cheverolet Malibu was named the 2008 North American Car of the Year, beating out the Honda Accord (and it has better fuel economy than the Accord!), and GM's Saturn Aura and Chevy Silverado were named 2007 North American Car and Truck of the Year, beating out the Toyota Camry and Honda Fit.

Why is Thomas Friedman saying "If we miss the chance to win the race for Car 2.0 because we keep mindlessly bailing out Car 1.0, there will be no one to blame more than Detroit’s new shareholders: we the taxpayers," when Detroit, and specifically GM, will release Car 2.0 in November 2010? Why is he willing to tout Japan's "government led electric car project" and yet spit on any effort of the American government to invest in a company developing an electric car that will destroy the fuel economy of a Toyota Prius?

Why, if the domestic auto industry problems are all self created, would a relative start up in Silicon Valley also be asking for government money to continue to develop the automotive technologies of tomorrow?

Why are we not talking about the Chevrolet Volt and what our nation needs to do to get it on the road today? Why are we willing to watch GM fail when the company holds our nation's best chance at lowering our oil consumption?

Why is no one reporting that our nation's highest paid autoworkers work at Toyota's Georgetown, KY and Fremont, CA plants?

In the follow-up memo, Toyota pointed out that workers at Georgetown and at New United Motor Manufacturing Inc. in Fremont, Calif., which Toyota owns with GM, are the highest-paid autoworkers in the United States.

Why didn't anyone remind Senators Bob Corker of Tennessee, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, and Richard Shelby of Alabama that all of their states have always received more federal funding than they've paid in federal taxes? Before they killed the auto deal, why didn't anyone remind these senators that much of the excess federal money their states receive comes from the workers in the states they've turned their back on?

Why can the American government quickly pass a bill that shells out $700 billion to financial institutions, but can't, over the course of a month, come up with a bill that releases $14 billion to the auto industry?

Why?

Free Press Editorial

Dear Members of Congress:

Remember, too, that Detroit helped rescue America as the Arsenal of Democracy in World War II and, through GM's no-interest loans, helped jump-start the battered economy after 9/11. Now, when our automakers and autoworkers need a hand up, will America really turn its back?

Domestic Auto Industry 101

Great coverage on freep.com regarding the domestic auto industry and the bridge loans. I hope America reads this, this, this, and this.

"And indeed, we now know what happens when a society runs its industrial systems not to manufacture products but to manufacture cash.

You end up with neither."

Please do your homework, Mr. Friedman

Dear Mr. Friedman,

First of all, I'm from Flint, Michigan, and like so many others from Flint, I come from a GM family. My Grandma worked there, my Dad worked there, most of my friends' parents have worked or work there, and I've worked there too. So though I won't claim that I have an unbiased opinion, I will point out that I'll be the first one to talk intelligently about the domestic auto industry's problems and I try to avoid defending the Big Three if they don't deserve it. They're far from innocent. I will, however, defend Detroit when the industry is written off as "un-inovative" and a column suggests that its far behind/more guilty than any of its foreign rivals.

In your most recent column, "How to Fix a Flat," you suggested that the most recent $25 billion in loan guarantees to the domestic auto industry was a U.S. taxpayer bribe to innovate. In fact, in 2007 GM spent only slightly less than Toyota on research and development and was the second highest spender in the world (Ford was 6th). As a percentage of sales, GM and Ford both outspent Toyota, and since 2006 GM has increased its research and development budget by almost 23%.

I think we can agree that the most radical innovations in the car industry over the past several years have been the emergence of hybrid engines and the improvements in fuel efficiency. Therefore, I'd like to point out that though Detroit came to the hybrid game a little late, GM and Ford now offer more hybrid models than Honda or Nissan and will have more hitting dealers in 2009. GM also offers more models that have 30mpg or better than any other car company. The $25 billion in loan guarantees aren't bribes, but rather money that will be invested in companies that lead the world in innovation and in many cases are leading foreign rivals in new technologies.

And please, Mr. Friedman, spare me the easy to find headlines that make the foreign companies look like the only ones currently investing in new plants fitted to meet the growing demand of fuel efficient models. A few weeks before your headline ran in autochannel.com, a similar one ran on Reuters.com: "GM to invest $370 mln to build new engine plant." This larger investment than the Honda investment you touted will help GM offer a four cylinder engine in a third of its models and is in line with the drastic measures GM has taken to realign its product lineup.

Now that I have that off my chest, I'd like to remind you that you conveniently forgot to mention the foreign car companies that were every bit as guilty in blocking efforts to raise fuel economy standards. The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers was a major player in lobbying efforts and includes, Toyota, BMW, and Mercedes Benz. These are the same companies that have all recently invested heavily in large pickups and SUVs, although GM, Ford, and Chrysler all offer a full-size pickup with better fuel economy than Toyota's equivalent.

Lastly, I hope we keep Silicon Valley away from Detroit. Detroit has major problems that aren't being addressed quickly enough, but the current crisis is largely due to the global economic slowdown and the freezing up of credit. The current crisis and the ongoing problems won't be solved by Steve Jobs. Silicon Valley can build a cool iPod, but it's apparently not that good at building cars.

Sincerely,
David Anderson