We're about to cover alot of ground fast. Check my facts if you question any of this. Can you use "The Google"?

Auto Makers Don't Deserve A Bailout

A Five Paragraph Fit, but with no profanity:

Back in the mid-20th Century there were SEVEN (7) independent automakers to buy from--apart from the current Big 3. In no specific order, they were Packard Motor Car Co., Hudson Motor Car Co., Nash Motors, Studebaker Corp., Kaiser-Frazier Corp., Willys-Overland Motors, and Crosley Automobile Co. Buying a car from one of these independent motor companies provided competition, and was a reminder to the Big 3 that consumers had choices. The free market exists, or at least did in the 1950's. I will mention "Tucker" once, in this paragraph, and leave you to go rent the movie about him (Tucker; The Man And His Dream) on your own time.

Kaiser-Frazier, Studebaker, and Nash all had 4-cylinder and 6-cylinder cars that got more than 34 MPG (not that smaller or economical cars were very popular at the time). Continuing; Crosley had the first sub-compact car. Willys had the first jeeps and suburban utility vehicles. This is some good information to know--especially when you hear some B.S. in a commercial about how one of the Big 3 "pioneered" or "revolutionized" something (they did nothing of the kind).

Hudson had a very sharp high-performance sports model available. Packards were also excellent luxury cars. In those 1950's, Studebaker had not one, not two, but THREE comfortable, sporty performance vehicles in the President, Golden Hawk, and Avanti. Ten years later (roughly), in 1964 Ford finally came out with something comparable in comfort, sport and performance; the Mustang. TV commercials at the time called the Mustang 'new and revolutionary' (Ask your parents/grandparents about the old Mustang commercials--they were hot stuff. And; my MoM owned a '65 Mustang, okay? This ain't no new news here.). 'New and revolutionary'? Sure; if you call: 10 years later, after 3 other models, by a different car company 'new and revolutionary'.

Independent car companies must have something special in their fleet to arouse interest. In the early 1990's Saturn tried for mass appeal with decently made American cars and a fraternal community of owners--I still don't know why that didn't work (it should have, and I wanted a Saturn). Being on the "leading edge" of smaller engines, smaller car bodies, economical aptitude, passenger safety, structured owner alliance, and now hybrid technology has never been important to American automakers--and still isn't now. The Big 3 have proven to be quite slow (or immobile), consistently, for decades, at initiating good ideas. I see no reason to reward them. Some good old-fashioned "tough love", in the form of a new business plan forced by bankruptcy is obviously the best solution. The "media" would have you believe that bankruptcy entails shutdowns and millions of job losses; if you believe that, then you deserve everything the media tells you (and you have not studied the true details in filing for bankruptcy protection).

So as we all change our lives because of the economy; as we watch the Big 3 beg for our tax dollars while claiming they will do 'new and revolutionary' things to overhaul themselves (sure they will), I want you to consider your own choices. Would you buy an American car? Have your current opinions about single-family vehicles been formed on facts, or advertising? Do you ingest information with a discriminating mind; can you utilize critical thinking, and do you apply real common sense--or just commoners' sense? It is (far past) time for all Americans to take a studious look in the 'mental mirror', and stop reciting catchy sales pitches. Good luck.

Oh; and do NOT try to tell Mustang people that their precious little ponies are just Studebaker clones; them's fightin' words.

Back to Homepage