An American Heartbreak
Tom Brokaw famously called my generation the greatest. I'll accept the title for those of us still around, but only for the years preceding 1945. I'm not so sure we weren't too content with ourselves post-World War II. We began to believe our press as it were -- something to the effect that we were God's gift to the planet, other nations and all its peoples. The gratitude for the civil rights and liberties so hard won gave way and and "More!" became our need and, over time, our obsession.
I don't mean to do a treatise here. I'd just put down the morning papers and can't stop thinking about what's going on with our car companies, and it just about breaks the heart of this member of Brokaw's Greatest Generation. I would have no way of overstating how deep and profound was our love for the American motor car and what a significant part it played in the now tossed around phrase, "The American Dream," then an all but holy right of passage. American families were told in hushed tones by banks and mortgage and insurance companies, that this was "The second most important check you will ever write," the first being for a home, of course. And that is what American families felt as they waxed and polished and hosed down their vehicles on the weekends of their long romance with the American Motor Car.
I spoke of this to President George H.W. Bush in 1989 when I was asked if I had anything to suggest to him as he assumed the presidency. When I say today's news just about breaks the heart of this member of my generation, this video might help the understanding of that:
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The American consumer "demanded" these cars? BALONEY!!!
If the American consumer "demanded" these stupid big gas guzzling hog cars the car companies would not have been one of the biggest accounts on the books of advertising agencies.
We don't get what we want, we get what we are taught to want by slick advertising and marketing.
Billions are spent on research and studies to find out what works in advertising to create demand for the supply that serves corporate interests.
Go to Europe and see what people drive. Modest energy efficient automobiles.
Is there an intrinsic difference between the American
consumer and the European consumer?
And for that matter when we did stop being citizens and shift to the consumer identity.
Same problem with the "health industry" which is in fact a disease business industry that treats the human body as a profit center.
Brava, Ms. Bride!
The Consumer Society did not spring to birth through spontaneous combustion -- ad agencies work very hard to convince us to have, "all the things we don't need, but can't afford not to buy."
Incredible, no one seems to mind that all those millions of new cars sold each year mean that other millions of cars will be abandoned, destroyed and compacted in junkyards. Make, sell, destroy. Make, sell, destroy - Is this a sane way of living? Remember Huxley's Brave New World - while people slept they heard slogans like "Dont repair, throw away..." Will Americans change their ways now? Will they follow Rahm Emmanuel's advice and not let a crisis go to waste? Will they become unadicted to consumerism and stop buying new cars neeedlessly? Will they adot public transit, bikes, electric cars? Remains to be seen.
Look, we know that money is how our society works, and we know that car companies have wanted to make lots of money. We also know that they have probably been in cahoots with the oil companies to keep gas mileage low--after all, most cars made in the last 30 years get the same mileage as the new models being made. But we've all heard stories of how very efficient engines were squashed, bought off by the car companies and shelved. And we've all had a car that had some obviously planned obsolescence built in. Well, we don't want that anymore. We want car companies to come clean with us--and that means the engines too. They have distorted the information about global warming and the environment so that they didn't have to change, and they have kept their cars coming back to their repair shops, and it's just not good enough anymore. We Americans like our independance, but there are cheap efficient ways of transporting people, and some of that solution will have to include public transit--another thing the car companies killed in more than one city.
You are repeating one of the oldest urban legends in the book. There were never any super-efficient engines that were squashed; the fact that fuel efficiencies stayed flat over 30 years reflects consumer choice. People wanted bigger cars as opposed to smaller ones, more horsepower rather than less, 4 wheel drive as opposed to two. So for a (now) government-controlled industry, there lies the problem that all socialists face: how do we eliminate the sheeple's choice without letting them catch on that they are losing freedoms? Nationalizing the car industry in the name of saving jobs, and radically increasing CAFE standards in the name of the global warming scare are a good start. But pushing public transit on them is the next step. Mark my words - When fuel economy standards are better, even though you will be paying more for a car and saving money at the gas pump, then they will raise the fuel taxes so you will pay more both ways.
Ah yes the argument for a Hummer in every driveway. So thats the real reason we should all continue driving Hummers, because if we drive really efficient cars then the Government will just raise gas taxes and take more money from us. Moronic reasoning at its best.
What were you hoping Bush would do?force GM to make a great car? My family stopped buying American cars because when we had them they were always in the shop. We have not had an American car in 25 years. Nothing any president could do(until now as we own the companies now) could have changed that.
I haven't bought an American-made car since the mid1970s. Mostly, because of the lousy miles per gallon for gas consumption. Do any of you remember gas lines in 1979? America's automakers were in trouble then, and they never changed their ways. They only have themselves to blame and don't deserve a bailout.
When I make financial bad decisions, I must pay the price of that bad decision. It should be no different with US automakers.
Yes Norman, prophetic, ..... but remember, nice guys finish last.
Now, you you had been standing on a table screaming, or throwing your Gucci shoes at that tone deaf, nattering naboob of negativity maybe somebody would have hear this talk 19 years ago when it might have done some good.
I'm kind of tired of these "see, I told you so" victory laps. Environment, Iraq, Bush II. You want to tell me what you are doing TODAY?
I'm surprised that not many of the comments posted mention another guilty party to all the auto companies crimes. The American consumer. I don't care what anyone says, the car companies would not have continued producing dinosaurs if the American public wasn't snapping them up so fast.
The public wanted the big, gas guzzling suv's and Hummers! Nothing is going to change until the buying public starts making intelligent decisions. Once that happens the surviving car companies will have to produce what the public wants to buy.
We need to stop being so self centered and materialistic. I get tired of people asking why there aren't more USA made products available. The simple answer is that Americans don't want to pay what an item is really worth in both materials and labor - and can't stand to do without!
Bingo! In other words, keeping on buying those cheap Chinese goods at WalMart and then keep on complaining about how all our jobs are going overseas.
If the auto industries in America.. both domestic AND foreign want to do well...
They need to offer the consumer something I actually WANT enough to part with a chunk of cash.
I have a 1993 GMC Jeep Cherokee Sport. It gets about 22-24 mpg and almost never breaks down. It goes everywhere an SUV is supposed to, has cargo space in the back and has room for 4 adults. It's maneuverable enough to take a small roundabout with ease and fits into an average parking spot easily.
I have a 1998 Ford Escort, it gets about 28-30 mpg (in town-highway), it seats two adults in the front and two children in the back. If you're over 5'3" tall forget the back seat for longer than 1/2 an hour.. it's agonizing. The parts are cheap, it needs minimal repairs (which I can do myself at home), and it has a decent sized trunk.
A new car only gets about 24 mpg and isn't any better than mine.. why would I buy it?
A new SUV gets MUCH worse gas mileage, costs more, and won't fit in a standard parking space with room to open the doors, why would I buy it?
I own perfectly good cars that are already paid off, work well, and get decent gas mileage. I don't have more "bells and whistles" because I don't WANT them. I make more than enough money to buy a new car.. I just don't need one.
I recall that GM downsized their cars in the 80s. Cadillacs were small, FWD cars. Chevy re-branded a Suzuki into the Chevy Sprint whose 3 cylinder engine got up to 50 mpg. It later became the Metro. I live in Southern California and during the 80s and early 90s, the only trucks I recall on the road were small Toyota V-6 trucks with huge river crossing tires. But, wait, these small cars were what Americans supposedly wanted, right? Well, not exactly.
As the 90s progressed, trucks got bigger and bigger and full-sized American trucks replaced those little Toyotas, I'm guessing it was a styling choice rather than utility. Then came super-cab trucks. GM returned to rear-wheel drive for their Cadillacs to keep up with the competition from Lexus and the German car companies. SUVs got bigger and more powerful and more luxurious. Cadillac and Lincoln started making them, for crying out loud. So, this BS about Detroit not making cars that Americans wanted was not true during the 90s and early 2000s. Why were all those large trucks and SUVs all over the road? Someone was buying them while small, economy cars weren't big sellers.
Granted, Detroit had a quality and reliability problem. How did Hyundai go from a joke to making cars that are catching up with Honda and Toyota as far as quality in a few short years while Detroit has been so slow on that project?
GM, Ford, Chrysler got a free ride for years for being "American". That let management skimp on quality and design. They concentrated on preserving the free ride with advertising rather than engineering. In the end, it caught up with the whole industry, but everyone was drinking the Kool Aide and saying how great it was for a long, long time. Some still are.
Politicians in the Rust Belt states pandered to the companies - and the unions. At least there was some balance there. The South is creating a modern serf class and saying how great that is.
How GM et al could sleep through the obvious changes that began with the 1973 "oil shortage" followed not by any great campaign to sell in the US, but GM/US car maker's endless clueless ignorance of why people were buying Japanese cars. Then another "oil crisis" in 1979. Did any US car maker finally domestically produce a lighter, tighter, more agile vehicle that could compete directly with Japanese cars? Of course not! And that was THIRTY years ago!
We're supposed to shed a tear for these clueless, stiff, executives who haven't had an original idea in sixty or seventy years? They couldn't even knock off a copy of a Japanese car?! Let 'em perish. Case closed. Game lost by forfeit.
You can't blame union workers for the fact that GM innovated nothing whatsoever in the past 75 years.
Unfortunately, many Michigan autoworkers are going to profoundly suffer when they lose their high-paying union jobs. They have become accustomed to a certain standard of living, and acquiring another job that offers the kind of pay and benefits that they had earned as autoworkers will be practically impossible -- especially in this troubled economic environment.
Globalization has changed every game in town, and the sooner that Americans swallow that bitter pill, the better. With throngs of foreign workers willing to perform the same jobs for a fraction of the pay of their American counterparts, while producing a better/cheaper product, Americans had better prepare for a tsunami of economic woes coming down the pike. "The greatest generation" ruled the global roost, so to speak, when they victoriously marched home from the war with the world in their hands, but those days are history. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that a country that comprises only 5% of the world's population, yet consumes 25% of the world's oil, has been getting a bit more than its share of the world's resources. We are simply witnessing the leveling out of the proverbial playing field...to the detriment of the American worker.
Not Michigan so much, not in this round. Michigan started getting hit ten years ago. This round it will be everywhere else via the dealership closings, and all the Federal politicians representing those areas will gnash their teeth, cry their eyes out, blame someone else, and refuse to take responsibility for their failure to set sound energy and foreign trade policy.
A few years ago before GM started making moves to get healthy (which they were doing before the financial sector collapsed) everyone in Michigan was terrified. Now not so much, because we've become immune to the pain and know the worst of it for us has passed. It's the rest of you who are going to feel it now.
God save the tournaquets. The blood-letting of the American auto industry has just begun.
Sadly, it will take another 6 - 12 months for those who are not in the manufacturing sector to feel and understand what those of us already effected are too painfully aware of. My husband was permanently laid off from a secondary automotive job he held for 15 years ... we've had 7 months of unemployment with only my income as a freelance writer/website designer in addition to his unemployment insurance. It's been months since we ate out/went out... we've cut our cable services and all other non-essential services to the bone and we try to drive as little as possible to save gas. We're actually doing very well in the ways that matter (healthy, happy and can pay all of our bills) but as more and more people are added to the unemployment rolls, more businesses that have nothing to do with manufacturing will suffer. Our family ate out at least once a week. We went to the theater, movies, concerts, museums and we shopped ... all of those things have been curtailed. My husband has started cutting his own hair and has even taken a stab at grooming our poor dog.
Our thermostat has been reset ... we are thinking differently about money and security in a way that will no doubt benefit both us and our children. Your advice is valuable not only directed towards the auto industry ... everyone could benefit from a reset in thinking these days.
want some cheese to go along with that whine?
Pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered. UAW got $100/hr. in pay and benefits. And now you sit there and squeal as we put the buffett table away. You wanted me to pay $45,000 for a stinking, gas guzzling mechanically defective car when my parents paid $18,000 for their house and yard.
Do you see anything wrong with this equation?
Yes.... your math is what's wrong with the equation. UAW does NOT get $100/hr in pay and benefits... that's a talking point lie that rolls in all retirement pay and then divides the total by those actually working. The false hourly rate quoted gets larger and larger as more retire and fewer are working.
I am not whining in any way... we were aware that manufacturing jobs were going away and we prepared for years. We're facing our future with joy and good humor but our reduced pay WILL effect you and your family just as all of the pay and benefit gains that unions fought for actually raised wages for every industry, the loss of unions will also impact you in a negative way.
As I write this, GM is announcing it's bankrupcy officially... I'm sure that will make you happy plebe but in a year, you'll be wondering why your job is gone when you don't have anything to do with the auto industry.
As for the mechanically defective cars you speak of... we've always bought North American cars and I've never had a clunker. Our second car for 15 years was a 1978 New Yorker that we bought when it was 10 years old. At 25, we finally put her out to pasture because we bought a new primary car without trading in our F150 so we had 1 car too many.
"...something to the effect that we were God's gift to the planet,..." - I was there and I remember it well. The boomers were going to change the world forever but we turned out to be the biggest conformists of them all. The boomers got seduced by the beemers.
Norm, I grew up in Detroit and the auto companies were king. Everybody had to have a new car every year. It was our pride and notice that we had "arrived", if we could afford to trade in and buy a new one every year. No matter how raggedy the car was. Cadillacs and GMs were kings of the car companies. GM ruled the city. This is really sad, and I don't blame the unions for what happened bec. my brother was a union guy, and I know he worked very hard every day, until his body damn near gave out. The workers wanted to have more say in how the car was designed and how to run the companies, but they were never consulted.
Maybe had the auto companies had an "advisory" board of workers, this would not be happening. It's the workers who see the flaws and who buy the cars.
Anyway, yeh, everybody will be affected. There will be tens of thousands of layoffs and firings. Just wait.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/6448964.html
There are significant facts in this article to point to managment decisions that were the downfall of GM. One is the reduction of the workforce -- the loss of over 1/2 million employees in the ten year period, - - resulting in an enormous hit to the economy of hundreds of cities and the businesses supported by the auto maker. The "American" transportation industry, the smaller factories producing parts and the suppliers of raw materials - gone ! ! along iwth those jobs. The closing of numerous plants and opening the way for the vendors to set up shop outside the borders of this country has helped push us closer to the standard of living of 3rd world nations.
...which was the whole purpose of globalization and our free trade policies.
I remember when Nafta was passed by the Congress and pushed and signed by Clinton.
House http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1993/roll575.xml
Senate http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=103&session=1&vote=00395
Clinton, the Democrat, sided with big business, which turned out to be lucrative to the industrialists and mult-national conglomerates and to Bill Clinton (this is how he became very wealthy, folks.)
The vote in the House is an example of how the Democrats allow votes on bills that a majority of their conference opposes, something Republicans in the House NEVER DID.
This exposes the weakness in the Democratic Caucus, one that has not been rectified TO THIS DAY.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
