Ask the Best and Brightest: American Leyland or Government Motors?

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

It was I who invented the name “Maximum Bob” for GM Car Czar Bob Lutz. That said, I also coined “Rabid Rick” for GM CEO Rick Wagoner; clearly, I should have stuck with the Buickman-perpetuated “Red Ink Rick.” John Horner, a charter member of out Best and Brightest and yeoman TTAC blogger, first mooted the moniker “American Leyland” for the federally-funded (one way or another, eventually) GM – Chrysler mash-up. But it’s a keeper. Or is it? Evan Newmark’s column over at The Wall Street Journal’s Mean Street proposes another way of characterizing the insanity to come: “GM = Government Motors.” While I’m not completely enamored by the new name, Newmark’s arguments are entirely seductive. In fact, it’s the best anti-GM bailout diatribe I’ve encountered, here or anywhere else– not that the topic is large enough to deserve a genre, yet. Anyway, I’ve excerpted some of the best bits below, and put it to you, our B&B: American Leyland or Government Motors?




“There will be only one big loser–and that’s you, the U.S. taxpayer. You will pick up the multibillion-dollar tab for the consolidation of a failed industry that should have consolidated on its own long ago… Detroit’s decline has been a slow-motion car wreck spanning four decades. GM, Ford and Chrysler have been losing domestic market share for years to Toyota Motors, Honda Motors and BMW. Who actually admires Detroit for its car-making prowess? So, bail out Wall Street and save the global economy. Bail out Detroit and save–well, Detroit…

“Let each of the Big Three do what is in the interest of its shareholders and creditors. Let them try and merge with each other–if they can. Let them each file for bankruptcy-law protection–when or if necessary. When Chrysler goes bankrupt, let GM or Ford or a foreign rival pick up Chrysler’s assets on the cheap. If GM or Ford head into bankruptcy, let the government step in–but only on punitive terms. Punitive terms? Reduce all management, worker and retiree pension and health-care benefits. Remove all union contracts. Replace senior management and the boards. Haircut the creditors and recapitalize the companies. This is the radical direction Detroit has to go in if it ever hopes to compete with Toyota or Honda.”

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 60 comments
  • Bertel Schmitt Bertel Schmitt on Oct 29, 2008

    I like both. American Leyland for the cognoscenti. Government Motors for the in-your-face crowd. If there is no consensus, the maverik option would be "PC" for People's Car. It's simple. It's American. Even Ford would sign on. It worked before. You put stamps in a savings book, be promised a car which everybody knows won't be covered by the savings, and get nothing in the end - the savings are funneled into a war (or two.) PC would be a-propos in a world where nipples cause an uproar, and where BS is castigated for using "Yellow Peril." Warranty cases would also be much easier: "My PC don't work." "You need a new driver." PS: The PC would of course be made entirely from parts from the PRC, a TKD car, totally knocked down. PPS: All TTAC B&B will go to camps for sensitivity training - to pain PPPS: The PC would take half an hour to start. PPPPS: "It's a PC. Expect a bug."

  • Nudave Nudave on Oct 29, 2008

    I've always been fond of "Generally Mediocre". The average American is too stupid to realize the significance of the word "Leyland".

  • Fred I would get the Acura RDX, to replace my Honda HR-V. Both it and the CRV seats are uncomfortable on longer trips.
  • RHD Now that the negative Nellies have chimed in...A reasonably priced electric car would be a huge hit. There has to be an easy way to plug it in at home, in addition to the obvious relatively trickle charge via an extension cord. Price it under 30K, preferably under 25K, with a 200 mile range and you have a hit on your hands. This would be perfect for a teenager going to high school or a medium-range commuter. Imagine something like a Kia Soul, Ford Ranger, Honda CR-V, Chevy Malibu or even a Civic that costs a small fraction to fuel up compared to gasoline. Imagine not having to pay your wife's Chevron card bill every month (then try to get her off of Starbuck's and mani-pedi habits). One car is not the solution to every case imaginable. But would it be a market success? Abso-friggin-lutely. And TTAC missed today's announcement of the new Mini Aceman, which, unfortunately, will be sold only in China. It's an EV, so it's relevant to this particular article/question.
  • Ajla It would. Although if future EVs prove relatively indifferent to prior owner habits that makes me more likely to go used.
  • 28-Cars-Later One of the biggest reasons not to purchase an EV that I hear is...that they just all around suck for almost every use case imaginable.
  • Theflyersfan A cheaper EV is likely to have a smaller battery (think Mazda MX-30 and Mitsubishi iMEV), so that makes it less useful for some buyers. Personally, my charging can only take place at work or at a four-charger station at the end of my street in a public lot, so that's a crapshoot. If a cheaper EV was able to capture what it seems like a lot of buyers want - sub-40K, 300+ mile range, up to 80% charging in 20-30 minutes (tops) - then they can possibly be added to some lists. But then the issues of depreciation and resale value come into play if someone wants to keep the car for a while. But since this question is asking person by person, if I had room for a second car to be garaged (off of the street), I would consider an EV for a second car and keep my current one as a weekend toy. But I can't do a 50K+ EV as a primary car with my uncertain charging infrastructure by me, road trips, and as a second car, the higher insurance rates and county taxes. Not yet at least. A plug in hybrid however is perfect.
Next