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.

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.

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?

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.