He has balls! shifting manufacturing to Mexico, Canada and Korea and asking us taxpayers pay for their corporate mismanagement. Buddy, cut your salary in half and fund 10 engineers and researchers. They can work in another half of your palatial office, even without panoramic window.

That is Mark Fields for you.

Ok take him back

I have a good idea. Plug-in Hybrids are a JOKE. Lets have 300 million americans pluggin a friggin car in every night. This country’s gonna explode. O yea and to power up all these cars lets open some more nuclear plants and store the waste in our back yards. Whats the new american dream? Dying from radiation poisoning and growing an arm out your asshole.

GM is doing it on their own, why can’t ford??

Actually, Chrysler is using the same hybrid transmission as GM in its lineup next year. They(M-B & BMW) shared development cost with GM and all can benefit from it. Ford never believed in it and in wee hour just purchased set up from Toyota.

This is BS, Ford has some problems meeting the market and wants the Govt. to mandate part of our tax money to bail them out? WTF this is as bad as Bernanke using tax money to bail his friends out. Ford: you presently do not have cars that the consumer wants, we would like to allocate our money wisely and buy cars that we desire, being that you do not make a desirable car I am going to take my money elsewhere. I saw HELL NO just as I am about to use MY money to buy another make you lobbie my senators and congressmen to take my money away from me and use it to bail your ass out? So now I have less money either way? I personally think if this **** gets passed we should find out which of our elected voted for it and make sure the “green conscious” public know that they used our tax money to band-aid a ‘non-green’ company.

Here’s a crazy idea: Get the new Fusion/Milan hybrid to market right now. Honda and Toyota can’t sell enough of these cars. Sell them at full sticker and re-invest the money back into whatever research Ford needs.

You are right: it is crazy idea. Ford does not have hybrid Fusion/Milan

jumpoffit, GM has also said that the government should help with domestic hybrids. xyunya, true, the Fusion does not YET have a hybrid, but it is coming.

Give me a damned break! This guy acts like our weak president begging the Saudis for more oil. These @#@holes knew 30 years ago this day would come and what did they give the US market? Trucks and SUV’s. They did however give the European market what they needed, atractive cars that get decent fuel mileage. Eat what you made Ford!

CP92804, that is bull, if they saw this coming 30 years ago they would all be richer then Midas because of their clairvoyance.
Don’t you love Monday morning quarterbacks? The blogosphere is in seven shades of schadenfreude this week as a shocked Detroit wipes away the blood in the aftermath of May’s brutal sales slump: Why didn’t Motown see this coming? We told them relying on big trucks and SUVs was a dumb idea. It was obvious gas prices were going to rise. Fire the idiots!

Oh yeah?
If you’re reading this, I’ll bet my 401k that like Rick Wagoner and company, four years ago you didn’t figure you’d be paying over four bucks for a gallon of gas today. Because if you had, you would now be richer than Croesus, and lying on a tropical island somewhere, kicking back with a mojito or three, without a care in the world. Hey, we’re all still writing blogs. We didn’t see it coming this fast, either.

Of course it has been fairly obvious for a long time that among its many problems the U.S. auto industry was dangerously over-reliant on a single product category – full-sized pickups and SUVs – and that when the gas-price hammer eventually dropped, it was going to hit hard. But how did that happen? Three decades of CAFE and cheap gas, that’s how.

Let me explain. The first go-round on CAFE in the 70s meant American cars, which had tougher mileage targets to meet, got worse almost precisely the same time as pickup trucks became more refined and carlike with the addition of sound deadening, carpets, radios and air conditioning for totally unrelated marketing reasons. As a result, pickups, which kept their lazy, torquey V-8s and rear drive, started being purchased as substitutes for what American cars once had been, particularly with the introduction of extended cab versions. In fact, says long time industry watcher Jim Hall, of 2953 Analytics, the pyschographics of early extended cab pickup truck buyers were almost identical to those of Olds Cutlass Supreme, Chevy Monte Carlo, Ford Grand Torino Elite and even Chrysler Cordoba coupe buyers.

Automakers grudgingly built the more fuel efficient cars the government ordered them to, but we bought gas-guzzling pickups and SUVs by the millions instead because, hey, gas was cheaper than water. Who needed to drive a girly gas-miser?

So maybe we ought to ease up a little on the finger-pointing at Motown; the truth is we’re all a little bit complicit here. We wanted those big ol’ pickups and SUVs, even though many of us hauled nothing but air and never ventured further off the road than the Blockbuster parking lot. We happily slurped the cheap gas, and provided the demand Detroit tooled up to meet. Even the Japanese were seduced: Toyota has just spent over a billion dollars on a new factory specifically to make exactly the same sort of gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs GM, Ford and Chrysler grew fat and happy on.

We know what happened. The more important question is, what’s next? What does the short, sharp shock of May 2008 mean for Detroit? This much is certain: It means the industry going to get much smaller, much faster; the last vestiges of Motown’s Eisenhower era grandeur, when it commanded 90 percent of the U.S. market, are about to disappear as more factories are closed and workers laid off.

But it’s not just about factories and workers – it’s about marketing and brands and product portfolios and dealers, too. In May GM’s market share slipped to an historic low of just 19.1 percent, while Toyota’s grew slightly to 18.4 percent. GM has eight brands, more than 40 nameplates and over 6000 dealers. Toyota has three brands, just under 30 nameplates, and fewer than 1500 dealers. The math is compelling: Even if GM were to recover to 25 percent share, it’s still carrying way more baggage than Toyota. A lot has to change.

Detroit’s had tough times before. But this is not a trough in the usual boom-and-bust cycle. This is a paradigm shift 30 years in the making.

Government gives our money to companies to locate off shore; gives our money to Mexico to build their southern border fence; gives our money to oil companies to explore for oil that they are not allowed to drill; gives our money to Jap Government through subsidized cheap American oil; gives our money to third world countries (for nearly 100 years now) who are not much better off now than B-4. I’d much rather they give our money to American companies to develop better products and services and keep it all home grown! But alas, Our Government never listens to what the majority of the folks want. They conveniently forget who they work for!

NoName: props for seeing it for what it is, an environment with many variables and forces at work.

Hey notalent, what news article or other blog did you steal that from? That did not come from you, and no, I am not agreeing with it.

All, here it is. Noname stole his opinion from here:
http://forums.motortrend.com/70/6790064/the-general-forum/this-one-goes-out-to-a-very-special-shill/index.html

The mediator needs to restrict access or deny postings from noname. Can I get an AMEN?

Sorry about the double post everyone, either my computer is messing up or it was LLN.

Oh wait, my double post did not appear.

And before anyone asks, I never said that earlier post was my opinion, I was just showing something that proved what someone else was wrong, there is nothing wrong with using evidence and references to prove what you say.

Notalent, it is OK to reference if you give the origin of the reference and credit to the author. You did not. And exactly what part of the plagiarized post is evidence? The original poster does not reference either, which is OK, because it is his opinion or view. You may find a more inviting and less threatening area to play in here: (www.pbskids.org) because this area is for grown ups. Now, **** off.

I know Ford was showing off the Escape plug in hybrid.
Fields was short on specifics, but he said “we’re planning clean diesels for the F-150 and our large SUVs” in remarks at “Plug-in Electric Vehicles 2008: What Role for Washington?” Ford also showed a plug-in version of the Escape Hybrid with E85 flex-fuel capability.
Ford was also talking about their new 4.4 liter diesel V8, 330 hp, more then the 5.4 liter and better milage, too bad not coming out till 2011.

There is nothing wrong with ford asking the government for money to fund their plug in technology. In fact, they should have asked for it sooner. How do you think toyota paid for all the research and development of their hybrid? the japanese govt covered the cost. its about time the US does the same. Like a previous comment said, id rather stop sending our money every where else, and keep it right here to develop our own companies.

Just think, with that extra money, the domestic car companies could get a step up on other automakers, making a better product faster. and im sure everyone will want a plug in if prices of gas keep going up. This means that the technology will be in demand, meaning more production, more jobs, more money. Do you see the trend here?

tdubztx, if a company can not make a profit and be competitive on its own, it should be shuttered, that is the nature of capitalism, it is very Darwinian, the strongest survive.

if thats the case, then should toyota shut down since they got money from the japanese government and didnt do it on their own?

and how exactly do you think the strong survive? they look for any advantage they can get. and if you can get money from the government to help in research and development, then that will make you stronger.

ford also did post a profit in the first quarter of this year and has very competitive products, mercury, even though its about to die, is the 5th ranked auto brand in the jd power iqs, ford is ranked 7th.

tdubztx, I said survive on their own, as in use they money they make to fund research. Government should not be involved in business in anyway. Boeing, a PRIVATE company, does better then Airbus a government subsidized company.

A company makes a profit to upgrade their business and develop future products etc., if they can not make a profit and do this research and development and upgrade with the times, they should die, not be kept afloat by government help.

you have still not answered my point. if the japanese automakers are getting funding from the government, why shouldnt ford get it from the US?

Granted, its spectulation right now if toyota actually did rec anything from the govt, but see the following link

http://www.leftlanenews.com/toyota-refutes-jim-press-claims-that-the-japanese-government-funded-the-prius-project.html

This is an article from leftlanenews about the story. Read the comments on that page. Why is it no one cares if toyota gets these benefits from the govt but if ford asks for it, everyone jumps on them?

Im willing to bet that Press was telling the truth and toyota, like they do with everything, quickly swept it under the rug so no one could hear about it.

Heres another thought, theres so many things that get grants from the government already in the US, why not the auto industry? Colleges get grants to fund research, I could go get a grant today from the government to start a business myself if i wanted to.

What better way to help the nation, then to provide the support neccesary to get our country off of foreign oil and find alternative sources of fuel.

I disagree with the Japanese companies getting money from their government, but I do not live in Japan I live in America, and as a voter I do not want government involved in business. Plus privately funded research gets better results then government funded.

Government is involved in business whether you like it or not. heres another way to look at it. If you want to get a plug in vehicle in the future (who knows how high gas will be then) your going to pay for the research anyways. If the companies do it, you will pay higher prices so they recoup the expense. If the government does it, you might have to pay a slightly higher tax. Thats why chevy is having problems with the volt right now. its probably gonna cost around 40000. if the government would have contributed money or offered tax incentives, the price would be much more affordable. and you would save more on gas so it all evens out. just kiddin with that last line.

Not enterirely true, we had an era in the 19th century were government was very hands off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez_faire