- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
corner peel


3 bedroom, 2 bath


4 bedroom, 4 bath


5 bedroom, 9 bath

- Advertisement -

« Polls

What should the federal government do with General Motors?

Bail the company out30%
Let the company go bankrupt and reorganize69%
1105 total votes


1tdhjones(7 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

The union did not get GM or Ford or any other corporation into this mess; how many union workers get the golden parachutes and all the amenities that corporate executives are getting? This should be a loan from the government, not a give away. We all as Americans are going to have to get down to the brass tacks, use some good ole Amerincan know how and help solve this crisis by tightening our belts and using our heads.

Suggest removal:

2Shamus(6 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

Why not just pull out the automotive building equipment from the factories (since it's all on wheels for easy shipment to somewhere else anyhow) and start building solar panels, street cars, and wind turbines?
Are autoworkers to good to make a street car, or wind turbine? Would you rather have the six to eight weeks off in crappy weather to watch TV or get the same amount of time off during the summer?

Auto making is as narrow of a road for the Mahoning valley as steel was. Manufacturing in Northeaster Ohio's steel and auto industries made America great, but it is not those two products that define the people who made them nor do they have to be the only thing that comes out of the valley of steel. The steel and auto industries were so successful because they made what the whole world wanted. It's time for Ohio, for the Mahoning valley to turn back on and give the world what they want again.
You can go on and tell me about how solar, or wind or any of the other "Green" buzz word energy sources still need gas. FINE! But the world wants green energy and they need people to build it, so are you ready to stop b.s.ing and get to work or what! Or if the union won't allow their "autoworkers" to work on something else, again how about moving the auto making equipment out of the way while they shut down for six weeks to allow something else to be made in the plants?

Suggest removal:

3sinthor(87 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

Let them work it out!

Suggest removal:

4roofner5(6 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

They are the one who got there self into this mess by demanding more and more money for there employes Suffer..No other company is getting bailed out why gm they make to much money as it is for what.Other people in this vally would be happy to make 10.00 an hour but they need 20.00 plus that is a crock.

Suggest removal:

5cambridge(3921 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

Let the Japanese auto makers take over the facilities. They obviously have a better idea of what to build for the 21st century, their CEO's have salary caps (I believe it's 5 million with no multi million dollar pensions) and if they don't perform and the company fails they kill themselves.

Suggest removal:

6dock12(1 comment)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

Hard tomes call for hard decisions. Let GM declare bankruptsy and reorganize. Having worked for GM and seeing, first hand, how the UNION actually controls the company, I believe this might be GM's golden opportunity to regain its rightful position. Yes, it may be devestating to many, but the UAW through too many blood sucking negotiations, has harpooned the company. It is UAW gluttony -- too many high paying jobs, with people in those positions doing absolutely nothing. Some union trades will even laugh by saying how they got away with sleeping all day. Is it any wonder? GM has been bleeding to death, dying, for at least 15 years. A bail out would just give the UAW a future opportunity to repeat what has allready devastated GM. Then there's Ford and Chrysler with their hands out, as well. They all need to rebuild their companies, and not just put a bandaid over the wound. They will survive and come back stronger. They need to bite the bullet.

Suggest removal:

7DoctorGonzo(728 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

I think that if the capital budget of the United States for 2008 were presented in a detailed manner you would all disagree with your vote. I can only imagine all of the places Uncle Sam spends our tax dollars.
I tend to agree that GM needs heavy restructuring and our capitalistic ideals call for new business and competition to grow while underperforming business declines. If GM were forced into Chapter 11 or 13 and had to start everything again, this would be a good thing long term.
I also tend to agree that GM has brought 90% of this upon itself. As alluded to earlier, other car manufacturers began quality control production versus mass production and a better vehicle was developed. Other manufacturers do not have failing business models that have no chance of survival where the costs greatly outweigh the revenue. The UAW is an example of a union that is over reaching and GM management is an example of greed, greed, and more greed. Our politicians have also done a lousy job over the last 4 decades of reducing our dependence on foreign oil. When you are in bed with the sand people it is hard to advocate drilling here and reducing their profits, rightJimmy, Ronald, George, Bill, George? I digress.
Having said all of that, I have no problem advocating this loan from the government to GM, Ford, and Chrysler. I am sure my head would pop if I saw where Uncle Sam was putting the 25 billion in lieu of this loan. Think about it.
I believe the loan should be contingent on several factors. These should revolve around sound business practices. It should also be made very clear that this is GM's last chance. Do not screw it up. Take this loan as a life vest and save yourself. Do not just remain afloat longer.
In the end I do not think it matters either way. GM will have to file bankruptcy as they simply cannot operate long term under the current structure. However, they deserve an opportunity from the government to right the ship. Our government spends our tax dollars on things everyday that would make us cringe. I would rather an American industry get this opportunity than another country or some special interest group with whom I do not agree.
As far as the valley and its residents who do not like the idea are concerned, I am not sure you fully realize what will occur if Lordstown shuts down, even temporarily.

Suggest removal:

8MFC997(261 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

I am shocked at the comments here opposing the bailout in what is essentially a union town (my hometown). I think it speaks to how bloated and ineffective the unions have become in this country. They existed in the beginning for workers' rights, safety and the assurance of a decent wage. They exist now only to ensure the existence of the union as a political entity with the workers themselves a secondary concern. The companies lose, the workers lose, the communities lose but special interest groups and labor leaders win. Allowing these companies to fail and retool would be best in the long run as demand for good vehicles and workers to build them won't be going anywhere. I take care of many factory workers at the Honda plant in Marysville near where I live. They're non-union but have great benefits / wages and the community is thriving. The unions are dinosaurs. They are hurting this country along with the American worker. They need a reboot just as much as the companies who deal with them.

Suggest removal:

9pj(80 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

A loaded question, however; much thought should be given & taken before any results of ramification.

Suggest removal:

10VINDYAK(1824 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

We all were aware that our auto industry's current condition was coming sooner or later. The Union and the Management are both at fault. It's so unfortunate, but appears like a Chapter 11 is the only way out for a fresh start. Many, many, many people and suppliers will be hurt. A bail out by Congress will only be throwing good money at bad operations, bad workers, and bad products.

Suggest removal:

11stuckinOH(21 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

Does anyone here really think the Dems will not bail them out? UAW is such a huge contributor to them they don't dare risk restructuring that may include forced renegotiations (or elimination?) of union contracts. The Dems will vote a huge bailout-loaded with even more pork-and, as my grandpa (a GM retiree) used to say: "give a bandaide to a cancer patient".
15 second soundbite: "I saved the auto industry" (for today)

Suggest removal:

12XFilesX(77 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

I work for a union and recently had to take major concessions. It's time for the UAW to bend over just the same. No sympathies for them here. Let them banrupt and reorganize.

Suggest removal:

13sistersun(49 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

I did vote to let them go bankrupt and start anew,but how ever it goes,GOD has the the final say,I do believe Obama is our man for the job.Bush left this whole USA in a mess.People just pray GOD'S will to be done,It will all work out.

Suggest removal:

14apollo(1227 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

Gosh, I hope God doesn't get involved, Bush claimed God told his to invade Iraq!

Suggest removal:

15JeffLebowski(953 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

The notion that the union isn't willing to bear any burden in all of this is silly; in 2010 the UAW trusts will assume responsibility for retiree healthcare costs. This was agreed upon in the labor agreement last year and equates to billions of dollars.

In 13 months these billions saved go directly to the bottom line but the company can't operate that long in its current state, thus the need for cash to bridge the gap. Not bridging that gap puts 1.6 million jobs (employees, supplier employees, dealers, etc.) at serious risk at an already risky economic time.

Important concessions have already been made by the union and far too many would be adversely effected by bankruptcy.

Suggest removal:

16apollo(1227 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

What the big Lebowski doesn't mention is that a transfer from GM to the union happens to fund the retiree healthcare costs. I believe it is somewhere in the 30 billion dollar range. So in effect GM is still funding it but through a transfer of billions to the union. So who trusts unions getting their hands on 30 billion or so?

Suggest removal:

17JeffLebowski(953 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

Based on what I've learned that's factually inaccurate, burden will be wholly shifted away from GM to the union trusts. The trusts have been/will be employee-funded and thus healthcare cost comes off the GM cost sheet. There could be an company match that's already been paid that I'm not aware of but even if so that investment would have been made before the change took effect in 2010.

Suggest removal:

18JeffLebowski(953 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

Tomcat, is your butchery of basic spelling directed toward me? In addition to seeming rather bitter it is also quite vague. While it’s true that most companies don't have pension plans I am lucky enough to be in the employ of one that does...it is nowhere near as robust as I might enjoy with GM and I don't have the support of a labor union. Thanks for asking.

Suggest removal:

19redvert(2226 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

Do not see where Tomcat was saying anything more than just expressing his belief. In the battle of spelling it looks like a tie. One wrong for Tomcat,(hardley instead of hardly)and one wrong for JeffLebowski,(an instead of a) in "There could be an company".

Suggest removal:

20JeffLebowski(953 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

I meant to say that...

Suggest removal:

21redvert(2226 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

This is all in fun so my question is, why did you mean to say that since it was incorrect usage of the word?

You get the final say!


Suggest removal:

22JeffLebowski(953 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

Joking, it was a typo which you astutely caught...I was being facetious. Thanks for the Purdue link, this should be required reading for their student-atheletes.

Suggest removal:

23redvert(2226 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

Jeff, the reading part period is going to be the first hurdle the student athlete is going to have to overcome..... Of course if the athlete is good enough I imagine the university has designated 'readers".

Suggest removal:

24JeffLebowski(953 comments)posted 7 years, 5 months ago

If you're comment wasn't directed at me then my bad, that's why I phrased it as a question rather than a declarative statement. Also, I don't like being nasty to you, TC, but it is my job as a card-carrying liberal to do so...my hands are tied, I took an oath.

Redvert is right with me on the reading part, right on.

Suggest removal:


HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2016 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes