SUVs plunge toward 'endangered' list

[Crayz9000]

It could also be a case where you have title but don't hold title if that makes sense. I mean that in maryland your title does indicate that you are owner however it is not "free and clear" title so there is a notarization that the loan company holds a secured interest. I think its odd that you wouldn't hoave and hold the title though because otherwise you wouldn' be able to sell the car before paying off the loan. Without the title document you usually can't sell or transfer avehicle so it would seem odd that you don't have the title.

California does the same thing on vehicle titles. There's a "lienholder" field on the title that shows who really owns the title; until the vehicle's paid off and the company stamps/signs off on the title, you can't do anything with it.

[Spin Echo]

Ugh, my financial plan involves going $30-50k into debt to pay for college (plus any more if I choose to go to graduate school). In hindsight I regret focusing entirely on expensive private schools rather than considering the public options. But I've always figured that the debt would be okay because I was going into engineering and I always got the impression that engineers had a good job market.

This is the point in life where you get to start making hard, expensive choices. There are some things where debt is OK - buying a car, a house, or an education. Unfortunately, college costs are astronomical - I left college with a total of like 7k in debt and paid it all off in ten years despite low wages.

Yes, engineers generally have good job prospects. However, you may still go through unemployed periods in your life, particularly when starting out. I didn't get my "six months in the bank" until I was 12 years past college, that was the soonest I could do it. Nonetheless, it's a worthy goal if you're thinking "how much should I save and put into an easily accessible place?" Most people have two months or less readily accessible. You can't always do this, particularly when young, but keep it in mind.

When I worked for my alma mater's alumni office soliciting donations, there were a depressingly high number of people in the 25-35 age range unemployed. They'd talk about they hadn't been able to find a job in two years and were living in their parents' basement. Even engineers from a very good school can't take their employment prospects for granted.

[Darth Wong]

When I worked for my alma mater's alumni office soliciting donations, there were a depressingly high number of people in the 25-35 age range unemployed. They'd talk about they hadn't been able to find a job in two years and were living in their parents' basement. Even engineers from a very good school can't take their employment prospects for granted.

You can blame that on the Baby Boomers: a generation which has set high water marks for self-absorption and which continues to fuck up the country in search of its own gratification. George W. Bush himself is a classic example of that generation's collective misdeeds: youthful recreational drug use, paroxysms of guilt in middle age followed by a rapid slide into religious conservatism, brazen material selfishness on a breathtaking scale, gleeful use of debt, lack of concern for future generations, all coupled with an overpowering sense of his own moral superiority. He's the perfect example of what's wrong with the Baby Boomer generation.

[starfury]

all coupled with an overpowering sense of his own moral superiority. He's the perfect example of what's wrong with the Baby Boomer generation.
_________________

That Last part was really made me angry, the rest were at least normal selfishness, lack of concern crap, but the fact that they did all this huge sense of moral superiority was really made it difficult to stomach.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

When I worked for my alma mater's alumni office soliciting donations, there were a depressingly high number of people in the 25-35 age range unemployed. They'd talk about they hadn't been able to find a job in two years and were living in their parents' basement. Even engineers from a very good school can't take their employment prospects for granted.

The only really safe thing to do is just keep going in school as long as possible. This whole issue ties in immensely with degree inflation, where you need to get higher and higher educational levels to easily secure a job. I'm more and more thinking of going all the way for a doctorate even though I'll be in my mid-thirties by the time I finish it, simply because I'm not sure there's any other way to secure reliable employment, fullstop.

[Adrian Laguna]

You can blame that on the Baby Boomers: a generation which has set high water marks for self-absorption and which continues to fuck up the country in search of its own gratification. George W. Bush himself is a classic example of that generation's collective misdeeds: youthful recreational drug use, paroxysms of guilt in middle age followed by a rapid slide into religious conservatism, brazen material selfishness on a breathtaking scale, gleeful use of debt, lack of concern for future generations, all coupled with an overpowering sense of his own moral superiority. He's the perfect example of what's wrong with the Baby Boomer generation.

That's one of the reasons why Barak is such a better candidate than Hillary, and why young people respond to him so strongly. Clinton is a full blown boomer, but Obama is only a boomer on a technicality, he's really a member of the next generation.

[WesFox13]

Oh jeez. I don't think I'm going to survive this hard time, unless I move into Urban Seattle.

Well, Basically, I'm 20 and currently in Community College. I'm trying to get a degree in compiuter programming or something to do with gaming, but I was thinking to move into Seattle after I had finished college.

About my Economic situation, My education is being paid by my parents, Mainly my mom who works as a Director of the whole Eastside division for Bank of America. My dad used to be a pilot before suffering an Eye injury about 9 or 10 years ago. Now he's retired.

I have one debit card and Two credit cards, One from Bank of America and one from Capitalone, however, A great majority of the time, I use cash instead of my cards and only use em for emergencies or when I can't use cash (Such as an internet order or Paypal.).

I don't have a job as of now, but I hope to get a job somewhere in Seattle after moving there and after completing college. I live in a small Suburb devlopment on the Sammamish Pleteau about 18 miles away from Seattle.

So am I prepared for the Hard times that would be coming soon, or should I prepare to make my move to Seattle sooner than after completing colledge?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Oh jeez. I don't think I'm going to survive this hard time, unless I move into Urban Seattle.

Well, Basically, I'm 20 and currently in Community College. I'm trying to get a degree in compiuter programming or something to do with gaming, but I was thinking to move into Seattle after I had finished college.

About my Economic situation, My education is being paid by my parents, Mainly my mom who works as a Director of the whole Eastside division for Bank of America. My dad used to be a pilot before suffering an Eye injury about 9 or 10 years ago. Now he's retired.

I have one debit card and Two credit cards, One from Bank of America and one from Capitalone, however, A great majority of the time, I use cash instead of my cards and only use em for emergencies or when I can't use cash (Such as an internet order or Paypal.).

I don't have a job as of now, but I hope to get a job somewhere in Seattle after moving there and after completing college. I live in a small Suburb devlopment on the Sammamish Pleteau about 18 miles away from Seattle.

So am I prepared for the Hard times that would be coming soon, or should I prepare to make my move to Seattle sooner than after completing colledge?

The bus system in King County is so good that it's really not an issue for you, as long as you're prepared for enormously long commutes.

[phongn]

Well, Basically, I'm 20 and currently in Community College. I'm trying to get a degree in computer programming or something to do with gaming, but I was thinking to move into Seattle after I had finished college.

Be warned that game development isn't the easiest field to get into and not a few development firms are extremely demanding of your time (e.g. Electronic Arts). A two-year degree probably will not cut it if you're going into the "programming" side of gaming: shoot for an accredited Bachelor's degree in computer science or computer engineering at a minimum. Some schools, like UCF and CMU, offer professional graduate degrees in this field as well.

[Big Phil]

Well, Basically, I'm 20 and currently in Community College. I'm trying to get a degree in computer programming or something to do with gaming, but I was thinking to move into Seattle after I had finished college.

Be warned that game development isn't the easiest field to get into and not a few development firms are extremely demanding of your time (e.g. Electronic Arts). A two-year degree probably will not cut it if you're going into the "programming" side of gaming: shoot for an accredited Bachelor's degree in computer science or computer engineering at a minimum. Some schools, like UCF and CMU, offer professional graduate degrees in this field as well.

Even Lake Washington Tech or ITT would be better than community college.

[phongn]

Even Lake Washington Tech or ITT would be better than community college.

To be fair, he can use his associate's degree as a bridge to a real degree. Also, WesFox, it might help if you take some extra maths and art courses on the side

[Big Phil]

Even Lake Washington Tech or ITT would be better than community college.

To be fair, he can use his associate's degree as a bridge to a real degree. Also, WesFox, it might help if you take some extra maths and art courses on the side

WesFox, get out of community college and into a four year or technical school as quick as you can, and don't go mentioning the time you spent at BCC. It won't impress anyone worth impressing.

The phenomena of middle-class kids from the Eastside suburbs who take four years to get a two year degree (if they even finish), or just "taking classes," while living at home and playing video games, never really going anywhere, has ruined the reputation of the Seattle area's community colleges.

[Surlethe]

If minimum wage increases, a company loses profits. It can either drop employees and lose customers because the service gets shittier, or it can keep all the employees and lose to paying the employees more. If a company would lose less by firing employees, I'd think it would go ahead and do so.

It can already save 100% of the minimum wage by firing a minimum-wage employee, so it could increase its profit by that much if it fired the guy right now. If the minimum wage were increased by 20%, it could stand to lose 20% of minimum-wage by keeping him as opposed to firing him. Losses and potential savings are pretty much the same thing to a corporate bean counter.

That's not to say you wouldn't see a wave of lay-offs if the minimum wage were increased. They would do it just to make a political point. But it doesn't make sense that they would be forced to lay off necessary employees because of an increase in the minimum wage unless they're staggering on the edge and have no choice but to contract their business. Profit maximization as a motive works just as well (actually better) when you talk about laying off those employees right now.

If by contracting their business, their profits will decrease less than by keeping the workers and paying extra, they'll contract the business. It doesn't make sense for a business to lay off necessary employees before a minimum wage increase, but after a minimum wage increase, they face the option of either taking the hit to profits from the increased wages or taking the hit to profits from contracting the business. Your argument makes sense for relatively small minimum wage hikes -- I agree that for the reasons you've outlined, the effect of a moderate minimum wage increase on employment is negligible. All I'm saying is that, in principle, minimum wages do play a part in employment decisions. We'd see this come into play if minimum wage were increased 500% at once -- say, from $5.85 to $29.25.

Generally economists hold that the effect of price floors on the labor market has a negligible impact on unemployment compared to most factors.

Makes sense. The demand for minimum wage jobs is probably pretty inelastic, right?

[WesFox13]

SancheztheWhaler
and
phongn
Well, I was planning to head off to a regular 4 year college after finishing 2 years at BCC.

I'm also keeping my options open for careers. Even though I may get some programming skills, I have also looked to become a fiction writer, a computer artist, a chef, along with other jobs.

[Coalition]

I'm also keeping my options open for careers. Even though I may get some programming skills, I have also looked to become a fiction writer, a computer artist, a chef, along with other jobs.

Go for the chef. Being able to prepare a meal from scratch is a very useful skill. If you can make a fancy chicken dinner, while the other person can only make flavored ramen, chances are you'll get laid more often.

[Starglider]

I'm also keeping my options open for careers. Even though I may get some programming skills, I have also looked to become a fiction writer, a computer artist, a chef, along with other jobs.

You won't become really good at anything without devoting yourself obsessively to it for several years. Games programming in particular is hard (at least, the higher paid positions are, scripting missions not so much) and needs both lots of practice and a good grasp of CompSci-relevant maths. Writing definitely takes a lot of practice to get good at and is a ridiculously competitive field. I don't know much about being a chef but I imagine the same applies.

If you genuinely want to get into games, develop some impressive Freeware games and/or demos.

[Lonestar]

So...did anyone see that GM is closing 4 plants that make trucks and SUVs

GM parks the SUVs, squeezes into compacts
Giant automaker to shut 4 plants as gas costs soar

By Jim Mateja and Rick Popely | Tribune staff reporters
June 4, 2008


On a day of reckoning for the American way of building and driving cars and trucks, General Motors announced a bold attempt Tuesday to wean itself from a dependency on large SUVs and pickups, declaring that gasoline prices won't retreat and the company must sell more small cars, some battery powered.

The dramatic announcement amounts to a rejection of longtime Detroit economics, which dictates that bigger is better because larger vehicles are more profitable.

GM won't abandon pickup trucks or SUVs, but needs to make far fewer, so it will close four plants, including the factory in Janesville, Wis. That assembly line, built in 1919, makes the massive Chevrolet Suburban, a status symbol less than a decade ago now languishing on sales lots because it gets just 15 miles to the gallon in city driving.

GM, on a path to ceding the global sales lead to Toyota, will replace some truck production with a new, high-mileage Chevrolet small car built in Lordstown, Ohio, starting in mid-2010. GM also announced it will be ready to sell the electric-powered Chevy Volt by the end of 2010, signaling the company's confidence in mastering battery technology that could allow the car to travel far more than 50 miles on a gallon of gas.

Once earned huge profits
Automakers earned huge profits on the production of each big vehicle and stayed with the market even as demand cooled when gasoline prices inched past $3 per gallon. But with oil costs well over $100 a barrel and gas selling above $4, GM is acknowledging that consumers have reached a tipping point in buying behavior and won't go back to spending lavishly on big vehicles.

"We at GM don't think this is a spike or a temporary shift," said Rick Wagoner, GM's chief executive.

Wagoner also said the future of the company's Hummer franchise is in review, with an overhaul of the military-style vehicle lineup or a complete or partial sale of the division possible.

Sales of larger vehicles, weakening for several years, have nose-dived in the past two months. GM said Tuesday that pickup and SUV sales dropped nearly 37 percent in May, while Ford's were off 26 percent. Ford's U.S. sales chief Jim Farley said small and midsize cars made up 47 percent of sales in May, up from 34 percent—or 1.5 million—in February.

"May was a watershed month," Farley said. "We are, as an industry, catching up with the breathtaking choices customers are now making."

The American auto industry has been down this road before, caught off guard by market changes in the 1970s and 1980s in the wake of the Arab oil embargo and Iranian revolution, when Japanese imports started luring buyers from gas-guzzling V-8-powered sedans. By 1980, the Big 3 were vowing to recapture lost ground with smaller, fuel-efficient cars, but quality problems ensued.

Lost market share
By the time Detroit got competitive again with Japan, the Big 3 had lost a significant amount of market share, but found a new source of earnings growth in supersized SUVs, minivans and four-door pickup trucks. With those markets now in tatters, questions again are being asked about whether GM, Ford and Chrysler moved fast enough to notice shifting tastes.

"GM has taken some big steps, so it's not too little; we just have to hope it's not too late," said auto analyst Joe Phillippi. "I'm surprised GM didn't have the foresight to see the higher prices coming and that we aren't going back to $2-a-gallon gas prices—not soon and not ever."

The Big 3 already were in painful retrenchment. All three American companies are shedding workers, closing plants and cutting production to find a profitable level of doing business.

GM had telegraphed that big changes were coming Tuesday, the day of its annual meeting, but the details shocked. The company said it would cease production over time at truck plants in Oshawa, Canada; Toluca, Mexico; Moraine, Ohio; and Janesville. Janesville will stop making medium-duty trucks by the end of 2009, and the Tahoe, Suburban and Yukon SUVs in 2010 or sooner.

GM said the truck plant cuts, which will reduce capacity to produce pickups and large SUVs by about 35 percent, will save the company $1 billion per year and, when combined with earlier measures, by 2011 will save $15 billion over 2005 costs.

The Janesville closing will eliminate about 2,200 jobs, but many workers hope to latch on at other GM facilities, which could have openings when the latest round of 19,000 early-retirement seekers is complete.

"By no fault of our own, the market has shifted to small, fuel efficient vehicles," Local 95 President Brad Dutcher said. The union will try to persuade GM to find a new product for Janesville, but the plant would need to be retooled at a cost of hundreds of millions. "That's a huge expense," he said. "I don't want to give false hope to our members."

Shift in demand
The biggest shift for GM is acknowledging suburban homeowners don't want big SUVs and pickups anymore.

"Making money selling small cars is going to be a problem because the revenue you take in on a small car is close to the cost of building a small car," said Jim Hossack, vice president of AutoPacific. "So how do you make money? You raise the price of small cars."

Hossack also expected more GM cars to be sourced from South Korea and other overseas markets.

Wagoner, at the annual meeting, said GM has lowered costs enough with new labor contracts and other measures to turn a profit on more smaller cars. He also committed to building the Volt, which can run for 40 miles on a battery plugged into a home socket.

Of course the Unions are already bitching about a lack of a deathpact.

GM Headquarters in Canada Blockaded by Union Workers (Update1)

By Bill Koenig

June 4 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Corp.'s main office in Canada was blockaded today by Canadian Auto Workers members protesting the automaker's decision to close a pickup-truck plant.

Members of CAW Local 222 started blocking the entrance to GM's Canadian headquarters in Oshawa, Ontario, at about 4:30 a.m. Toronto time, union spokeswoman Shannon Devine said in an interview. While the labor group is preventing vehicle access, employees are being permitted to walk to the facility, she said.

GM said yesterday it plans to shut the pickup plant at Oshawa next year, one of four factories the automaker is closing as it cuts output of pickups and sport-utility vehicles. The Detroit-based company, which hasn't had an annual profit since 2004, is paring annual truck capacity by 700,000 vehicles.

Stew Low, a Canada-based GM spokesman, didn't immediately return a telephone message seeking comment. CAW President Buzz Hargrove yesterday called the plant closings ``illegal'' and said it violated the union's new three-year contract with GM. Hargrove said the labor group would fight the decision.

Local 222 decided on the blockade instead of striking, Devine said. Workers at the Oshawa factory reported for work today. Union members who are blocking the offices either work other shifts or are laid off, she said.

The CBC reported the blockade earlier. GM fell 16 cents to $17.42 at 9:33 a.m. New York time in New York Stock Exchange composite trading.

To contact the reporter on this story: Bill Koenig in Southfield, Michigan, at wkoenig@bloomberg.net

[Darth Wong]

GM was given hundreds of millions of dollars in government money as part of an incentive program to keep jobs in Canada. If they breach their agreement by cutting back jobs below the threshold of the agreement, the government should go after them to get that money back. That's only fair. As for Buzz Hargrove, he can go fuck himself.

[Broomstick]

On the other hand, GM might cut back on Canadian workers to the bare minimum, which I think is more likely. Then again, they might just break the agreement and hope that being based in another country will protect them. But I agree, if they break the agreement there most certainly should be a penalty

[Ma Deuce]

As for Buzz Hargrove, he can go fuck himself.

As can the NDP. Jackass Layton's reaction to this news basically confirms his party really is nothing more than the political arm of the Unions, and any other concerns are secondary. I love how both of them are blaming the Conservative government for this closure. It should be obvious even to those opposed to the Conservatives that they are not responsible for the factors that led to this closure, but it seems clear Hargrove and his NDP whores aren't above outright lying for cheap political points.

Also, despite Hargrove's claims this violates the labour contract, it technically does not, as GM didn't promise anything beyond delaying the layoff of the second shift until September of next year, and this closure happens after that. One could argue it violates the "spirit" of the deal, though it's not like the Union hasn't been above doing that in the past.

On the other hand, GM might cut back on Canadian workers to the bare minimum, which I think is more likely.

They'd probably try to move some of them into the Oshawa car plant, which is currently running under capacity and is retooling itself for flexible manufacturing. Some have suggested converting the truck plant to assemble smaller cars, but that's probably not economically feasable, given the vast difference in the assembly process of larger body-on-frame vehicles vs. small unibody cars, especially since the car plant already has capacity to spare and will be flexible enough to build cars of different shapes and sizes once the conversion is complete. On the other hand, Ford is converting it's Mexican F-150 plant to build Fiesta subcompacts, so I guess such a conversion makes sense in some cases.

This reminds me, I wonder what Toyota is going to do with that vast truck plant & supplier park they recently built in San Antonio to build the Tundra pickup and Sequoia SUV, when the volumes they were anticipating for the much-larger, much-hyped redesigned models never materialized, and actual demand can probably be met by their existing facilities in Indiana: The Tundra and Sequoia's sales declined so dramatically in May to offset all the gains made by Toyota's cars and pull overall sales lower year-over-year.

I guess Detroit aren't the only ones to make that kind of mistake.

[Broomstick]

This reminds me, I wonder what Toyota is going to do with that vast truck plant & supplier park they recently built in San Antonio to build the Tundra pickup and Sequoia SUV, when the volumes they were anticipating for the much-larger, much-hyped redesigned models never materialized, and actual demand can probably be met by their existing facilities in Indiana

Some layoffs are expected at their Indiana facilities, more's the pity - my state doesn't need more job losses. We are, however, hoping they keep the plants open so at least some folks keep their jobs.

[Starglider]

Sequoia SUV, when the volumes they were anticipating for the much-larger, much-hyped redesigned models never materialized,

I can see why Toyota expected the second-generation model to do so well with 'average Americans';



Plenty of SUVs look vulgar and stupid (e.g. the H2), but that one looks positively obese.

[Darth Wong]

Still not as self-consciously excessive as bad as the Hummer H2. The Hummer H2 is the "penis envy" car of choice.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Killing off the H2 as they're doing may win them some points in my book, but they need to radically rethink their strategy to stave off death. The Volt coming out in 2011 is too little, too late. And EVs have horrible longevity with current technology given the price.

[Crayz9000]

Killing off the H2 as they're doing may win them some points in my book, but they need to radically rethink their strategy to stave off death. The Volt coming out in 2011 is too little, too late. And EVs have horrible longevity with current technology given the price.

Problem is, all the automakers fall into that boat. Ford has no projected EVs or serious hybrid designs beyond the Escape at the moment. Chrysler is even worse.

Nissan is actually the only automaker other than GM that I'm aware of with plans to release an all-electric vehicle.

When you start talking about hydrogen fuel cell cars, it's even worse because there is no hydrogen infrastructure, and the automakers know that -- so they won't put any models into production.