While GM and Friends Seek $50 Billion in Public Funds, There is no Mention of Help for Public Transit

It's even worse in the Pittsburgh area - we are being threatened with a public transit strike by December. The last strike in 1992 lasted almost a month and caused a lot of congestion, it will be worse now. Since we have only one public transit agency - Port Authority Transit - there is no other public transportation here.

This post is seriously short-sighted.

"...there is no clear or specific plan for how that money will be used to benefit the public or save jobs."

Yes there is. You just haven't done your homework. The money is specifically to be used to facilitate the transition to vehicles more in line with rapidly changing market demand. The benefit to the public is the prevention of the collapse of an industry that would take about 2.5 million jobs with it directly and possibly the entire global economy in a reaction like that of the 1929 stock market crash. If this happens it will cost the public far more than $50 billion and lessen if not eliminate the availability of funding for public transportation as tax revenues plummet from the resultant unemployment.

"Now is the time to look into technologically superior and proven alternatives that are significantly more efficient and could meet transportation demands for the near and far future."

But it does not benefit everyone. Outside of major metros, public transportation is far less efficient or feasible. How does it "meet transportation demands" for anyone else? Where is the benefit to the rest of the economy? Where is the clear or specific plan?

"It will also, as a byproduct, undoubtedly create millions of new jobs"

Undoubtedly create millions of jobs? How about some sources for that claim, because I have some doubt.

"the millions it would almost immediately benefit is something to consider before a decision is made."

How immediately do you think the benefit of mass transit projects would have any effect on the economy? Public infrastructure projects take years to implement much less have an appreciable economic impact.

The auto industry on the other hand is in danger of failing in a matter of months which could IMMEDIATELY result in millions of job losses, and not just to the domestic auto manufacturers, as their failure would in turn cause the failure of suppliers who are also suppliers to foreign auto manufacturers and other industries who would then in turn would be at risk of collapse. How sustainable will mass transit be if there are no jobs to which people commute or from which tax revenue generated?

The auto industry is also the strategic base of manufacturing of the military. Without that industry, the US is at a strategic disadvantage. No president and no congress is going to allow that.

I'm not saying it is right, but auto manufacturing is so large and so intertwined into every aspect of industry in almost every industrialized nation, not just the US, that it is probably the single most influential industry, and the single most important to the state of the economy. Let it fall, and everything else follows.

Maybe to new green team can put the people, the public transport first. There is no logical reason to bail out GM. The hummers they made failed free trade. Give the money to the people who can innovate, who have a corporate responsibility plan, and who have a CEO to worker pay ratio that is less than 100:1.

gl:

I hope you really read this article clearly.

The Automobile industry has no future in the united states. The Automakers have treated their customers with disdain, and contempt for 30 years now. This is what they get.

I've written this many times, in different places, that if they want to survive, they need to make fundamental changes. This changes WILL NOT come.

Do you know why public light rail is so sparse now? Look up "National City Lines" in Google. You will then know, why there never was a "free Market" when it comes to transportation. Light rail is the single best thing that can happen to our county. It's clean transportation, that supports better land management, less sprawl, and it creates genuine jobs that pay well.

General Motors Corporation is getting their just desserts, for decades of anti-competitive practices, poor management, pathetic design philosophies and treatment of their customer, and the public at large. Let them burn in the fires of history.

I think the single best option, that would inhume two avians with one lithic projectile (look it up) would be to mandate the following:

Automaker's bailout would be tied to a conversion from making automobiles, to making the peices of the new light rail infrastructure. No rail, no money.

Since GM was instramental in removing light rail (national city lines), they should have to put it back.

They should be limited to 8% profit, and their executive compensation limited to how well they perform at getting the job done.

And it looks like more people around here are going to need their cars in case (and it is likely) PAT goes on strike.

The author wrote:

"...there is no clear or specific plan for how that money will be used to benefit the public or save jobs."

And GL replied:

"Yes there is. You just haven't done your homework. The money is specifically to be used to facilitate the transition to vehicles more in line with rapidly changing market demand. "

GL, that's not a clear or specific plan, that's a general intent or company direction. HOW do the big 3 plan to use this money to achieve your stated goal? What steps have they taken towards this goal without government help?

The big 3 have been drowning for a decade, their business plans simply DO NOT WORK, and giving them more public funds is just throwing good money after bad. The big 3 had their chance in the late 90s when the Clinton administration tried to work with them towards generating more efficient cars. The big 3 promised an 80 mpg car by 2004, yet as soon as Bush took office they walked away, flushing $1 Billion in taxpayer funds straight down the toilet.

GL wrote:

"The benefit to the public is the prevention of the collapse of an industry that would take about 2.5 million jobs with it"

There's no indication that any amount of money can save the big 3, they're essentially welfare corporations at this point, surviving only by the grace of the government. GM alone is losing $2 billion a month. A month! This industry is collapsing one way or another, the only question is when.

GL wrote:

" and possibly the entire global economy in a reaction like that of the 1929 stock market crash. If this happens it will cost the public far more than $50 billion and lessen if not eliminate the availability of funding for public transportation as tax revenues plummet from the resultant unemployment."

That's pure speculation. Maybe that's what would happen, maybe it's not. I'm not going to argue for an uncontrolled collapse of the american auto industry because there are too many dangerous variables involved. It's speculation, but it could happen that way. I will argue for controlled restructuring of the auto industry though. If public funds are going to be used to prop up these companies, the government should be able to force them to comply with whatever changes the government sees fit to cut out the bloat and shrink the companies to a level of profitability.

The government needs to take a two-pronged approach and prop up the auto industry just long enough to establish a robust public transport industry in it's place. In the meantime, if you want to be a welfare corporation, expect to face the consequences. Otherwise, live and die by your own merits, as capitalism dictates.

@gl

please to explain to me why I need to pay for modernizing the auto industry? this is not my responsibility? Just because the auto industry has been poorly run for the past umpteen decades doesn't mean the taxpayer should bail them out. People lose their jobs all the time, it happens. Better things will grow out of the collapse of these paralyzed mismanaged corporations.....

Why not make part of the provision be that they have to spend all of it towards hybrid/electric cars as well as going into the public transportation industry. So many public transit systems come from overseas because we are so behind.

Alternatively China just installed a bunch of diesel trains that DID come from the US and run more efficiently than any trains we have now. Why doesn't Amtrak or Santa Fe or anyone else get those engines. More power, less gas consumption, less pollution than current trains.

Today I got an e-mail for GM today with the subject line "Save the Volt," (I signed up for information about the volt).
The body text asked me to petition the government to approve this package.

What a farce. They threaten to kill an electric car once again.

If they do get this package approve, lets hope there are LOTS of strings attached.

Bailouts should be tied to performance. I like it when money accomplishes multiple objectives. Similar to WPA, appropriate funds to the Detroit automotive industry by ordering $25B-$50B of Chevy Volts to be built by GM, and Ford and Chrysler under license. Allow US taxpayers to have them for $100 (or whatever seems reasonable) per month. The users cost per mile goes down, it eases pressure on domestic drilling and foreign imports of oil, it helps ease the balance of trade situation, improves air quality, and accelerate the development and deployment of alternatives. Public transportation projects can be similarly developed. At least tax payers would get something for their monies.

You'd have to include money for smart city planning and development, because without wisely planned streets and buildings, public transportation is useless.

I propose a .50/gal gas tax to aid the auto industry. Hear me out. If the industry is to change into something sustainable - or even survive - it will require more than the bailout currently proposed, so just give up on that. Why don't we instill a gas tax while the prices for that fuel are tolerable? Use the funds to rebuild / revolutionize the US car industry? You've finally got the automakers by the balls, so use it to our advantage. To be clear I'm not arguing for a handover of the tax revenue without stipulations. If you also tie the % of the tax revenues the automaker gets to the fleet fuel economy of the cars they make, then there's real incentive to make those kind of cars. The better the MPG the more they get. With the rest of the tax $ start a Manhatten Project to create an electric car industry.

I don't really see the point of a bailout when it's just another burden for these big corporations to pay (which they obviously can't). The government should quit supporting the global economy as a whole and start subsidizing what people really can benefit from, such as capital-intensive public transit projects, urban greenspace, inner-city improvement, and family/independent farmers.

GM killed the electric car AND inner-city light rail. Bad ethical decisions, ridiculous executive salaries and profit margins, and a blatant disregard for the needs of their customers (small, fuel efficient cars instead of huge gas-guzzling trucks) are their own fault and downfall. Knowing that the government will bail them out if they really get into a bind financially just encourages this vicious cycle. I say let GM fall. It's a hard lesson, but big business has to learn sometime!

I say use some of the bailout money to help GM's suppliers retool their factories to make parts for public transit

I have to admit, though, the Volt is a really great program, showing that they are finally starting to get on the right track. GM should dump all their underperforming brands, and concentrate on getting the Volt out as quickly as possible if they want to survive.

The government (both federal and state) NEED to invest that 50 billion in public transit and renewable energy. Air pollution from cars costs the country several billion dollars a MONTH (according to Treehugger)! This way jobs lost from the big three have a better place to go.

The advantage of living in a city is that everything is close.

The advantage of using a car is that you reach long distances withoiut many restraints.

If you use both as they were intended to be used the answer is efficient cars for outside of the cities and efficient public transportation for in and between them.

The reasons for a car bailout are the same for a much more urgent public transportation bailout.

As somebody else said :

"Many Americans have already bought their last car they just don't know it yet".

"Do you know why public light rail is so sparse now? Look up 'National City Lines' in Google."

You realize that was 70+ years ago, right? A lot has happened politically and culturally in that time to contribute to the present state of the mass transit system. To say NCL single handedly destroyed light rail in the US is giving far too much credit to it, and NO ONE currently at GM had anything to do with it. Most of them weren't even alive.

But bringing up NCL is really a diversion from the point, which is that to let millions of people if not the entire economy and population suffer just to teach GM a lesson is ridiculous.

By the way, consider while you’re holding the current management of the domestic auto manufacturers responsible for everything their companies have ever done, GM’s CEO has only been in that position since 2003. Ford’s CEO has only been with the company since 2006, and nearly all of Chrysler’s upper management staff changed over after it was sold in 2007, and many of those people were not even in the auto industry prior to their current positions.

I hate to say this, but this is one thing that I agree with conservatives on: No more bailout money outside the 25 billion already agreed to for the Big Three. Quite simply, we need to update and add Mass Transit networks everywhere by all means and via all means available (Light Rail, Heavy Rail, Monorail, Maglev, PRT, etc).

what about bailing out the companies - but using their assets to lower barriers to entry in the automotive industry ,by changing industry structure ? this would enable more startups to compete , increase innovation , do alot to reduce global warming , and since america is the best country in the world in building startups , it might enable america to have the best automotive industry in the world .

while not without risks , currently there are no low risk options to this crisis.
maybe worth a try ??

In many Southern cities, despite reurbanization, major employers are reluctant to, often even refuse to, locate facilities on mass transit lines. Why? Racism.
African-Americans are major users of mass transit, and employers are trying to avoid them. Additionally, EEOC requires that employers hire by percentage of applicant pool, and on subway and bus lines, a plurality or more of applicants will be minority applicants.
Think Obama will address this problem? Not likely.