http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2008/11/13/we_need_an_industrial_policy_2 Comments On: We Need an Industrial Policy by Jonathan Golob en-us Copyright 2009 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:01 -0800 Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:45:00 -0800 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
I've been saying for days now, it's not the worker's fault that the heads of corporation made horrible business decisions. All of these so-called leftist liberals are so quick to blame the Big 3, quick to wish them bankruptcy without stopping to consider what that does for the several thousand line workers that would affect in a horrible, horrible way.

I strongly believe that if the Big 3 collapse, Michigan's economy collapses. If Michigan's economy collapses, that has an effect on the US-economy as a whole. If something isn't done *you will feel the effects of this*.
Posted by scotlanded]]> Fri, 14 Nov 2008 21:29:54 -0800 The Stranger
If they really are valuable they'll be snatched up by competitors. I definitely don't think they should be allowed to collapse without permitting the foreign competition to buy up their assets as they see fit. It would be pretty awful if that weren't allowed. But I'm sure it would be.

And if there really is room for all those jobs in domestic car manufacturing, again, their competitors will build more car plants here.

And really what's most important isn't actually that they literally go out of business. It's just that they have to be ALLOWED to fail, otherwise they have no incentive to be competent at all. I'm pretty sure that right now they're running themselves into the ground and not doing much work to stave off bankruptcy, because they've given up on surviving without government aid, and that's completely unacceptable.
Posted by john]]> Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:01:04 -0800 The Stranger This is too fussy to be in the main post. You are, of course, technically correct. The hydrogen that leaks, however, is highly reactive. Just about anything it becomes, including water vapor, is a greenhouse gas.

Your logic is like thinking adding CFCs to the atmosphere has no direct effect on the amount of UV radiation screened. It's true, but only if you fail to consider how CFCs interact with the other components in the atmosphere--like say, ozone.

And I think you are a moron, if you believe commuting with a Prius in any conceivable manner makes you environmentally friendly. Take a bus or a bike, or walk, and I'll be impressed.

and 31:
And how will the hydrogen for these fuel cells be made? From those same fossil fuels. Or from electricity, generated from the burning of fossil fuels. Producing the hydrogen wastes some of the chemical potential energy. It's a non-solution.

Yes, catalytic converters use the same rare metals. And yes, they are recycled. Fuel cells of sufficient generation capacity for a car--at least those I could find specs for--need more metal per car than is required for pollution control devices.

In contrast, a setup like the volt requires a smaller emissions control device (as the internal combustion engine driving the generator can be very small.) The fuel cell car? More rare metal, more weight in the vehicle, more toxic waste during production, shorter functional life and it still needs to be fueled with carbon-releasing energy sources--only with another efficiency-sapping energy conversion step added in.

Call me skeptical.
Posted by Jonathan Golob]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 19:11:07 -0800 The Stranger
Rare metals, like the platinum in your catalytic converter? Ever hear of recycling? That's the first thing that gets cut out of a car when it hits the junkyard. Same with fuel cells, you can recycle. More SUVs powered by fuel cells is hardly the answer, but they can be part of an energy efficient fuel use strategy. I forget, what are we pumping and mining out of the earth the most right now, oil and coal? Wasting most of it too with our inefficient machines. My bad...
Posted by fuel cells not a magic bullet, but...]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:59:32 -0800 The Stranger Hydrogen is not a greenhouse gas, it's a homonuclear diatomic and does not absorb in the infrared. I'm not impressed with your grasp of science at all.

GM's "vastly superior" hybrid technology has yet to hit the market. Until then, I'll be driving a Prius, available since...yeah, a while.
Posted by working on fuel cells and proud of it]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:54:02 -0800 The Stranger
Plug-in hybrids work now.

Not then.

By 2030 we'll have gone so far past the global warming tipping point that Vancouver will be a beachside resort year round.
Posted by Will in Seattle]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:53:57 -0800 The Stranger
and it hasn't been true for any of those things you listed. there is a persistent battle and ebb and flow to the market vs mandate operation and guidance.
Posted by Bellevue Ave]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:39:35 -0800 The Stranger
And tata motors relies on cheap indian labor. If you're going to sell a domestic made car made wholly domestic you're going to incur costs for labor that are far greater than foreign competition. Sure, slap a tarrif on those foreign cars but you know that isn't going to make american cars any more affordable. Nor does it rectify how Toyota and Honda employ many thousands of americans in making cars and the net effect that it would have on their employment.

The fact that certain sector jobs in the past provided health care and retirement doesn't mean the factors that persisted in those times are here today. You are linking manufacturing jobs to benefits without looking at the factors in transportation, technology externalities, resources, and competition that allowed those manufacturing jobs to command such value from their employers. No job sector has inherently more benefit than any other. it all depends on how valuable that job is.
Posted by Bellevue Ave]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:25:09 -0800 The Stranger
That has been our plan for healthcare, the environment, education, economics, scientific progress, employment and social equality since at least Reagan, if not before. People used to take this as gospel: many still do.

How stupid does that sound now?
Posted by Sir Vic]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:18:45 -0800 The Stranger Posted by tomasyalba]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:05:17 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Vince]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:57:17 -0800 The Stranger anything?

Not healthcare, the environment, education, scientific progress, employment, nor even basic economic policy.

No one plans for anything long-term, so isn’t that why we careen from self-induced crisis to self-induced crisis?

Posted by Original Andrew]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:57:12 -0800 The Stranger
I agree that American line workers are as good as any in the world. I agree that American Engineers are as good as any in the world. The failure of the American auto industry is not that of engineering or labor. The failure rests entirely at the feet of management. They could design more reliable cars, but they have actively chosen not to. They could design more fuel efficient cars, but they have actively chosen not to. They built all their profit margin in selling gas guzzling vehicles when anyone with a brain knew that gas prices would inevitably have to go up at some point. They hire teams of lawyers to resist any attempt to improve CAFE standards or safety features. If the American auto industry dies, it will have to be considered a slow suicide brought on by themselves, by completely short-sighted and incompetent management going back 3 decades or more.

I agree that it would be really bad to see the American auto industry collapse. Loosing that many decent paying jobs would be a big blow to the economy, and make a bad situation worse.

But we cannot reward execs for decades of criminally inept management. If taxpayers bail these fuckers out, it should only be done with huge strings attached, and upper management should be replaced wholesale.
Posted by Reverse Polarity]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:46:03 -0800 The Stranger
http://www.8trackheaven.com/Images/pumps…

Go DVD. Go hydrogen fuel cell.
Posted by John Bailo]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:45:02 -0800 The Stranger
Though your shotgun wedding approach is a much better option than bailing out GM.
Posted by F]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:35:15 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Mike in Renton]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:34:31 -0800 The Stranger
Companies generaly try to be smart about how they acquire useful talent. If Toyota sees that GM does powertrains well because of a team dynamic rather than because of a few gifted individuals, they will try to acquire the team rather than hire the individuals. (For example, Microsoft bought Bungie rather than just trying to hire away a few of their people.)

But really, you don't want your industiral policy to get down to the level of trying to identify indvidually useful projects. You may have good reasons for thinking highly of GM's powertrain team, but there is no way you have put the due diligence into examining all the details and interaction of their design with other factors of production that a company considering a multi-million dollar bet on that technology would do. Let the firms do that research and make those bets, and leave the central planning to the Soviets.

Finally, let's be honest about what is going on here. If GM gets bailed out, it won't be because some some very careful economic analysis presciently identified as having the highest ROI for the next $25B. It will be because of the concentrated voice of the auto-manufacturers and the UAW, and their influence with the party now in power.
Posted by David Wright]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:28:32 -0800 The Stranger
This Ponzi scheme has been in the works for decades now, but it is the current climate of "no one is buying SUV's" that has brought it to a head.

Fox News will blame this "crisis" on those evil unions, but it takes two to make a contract - only one to break it.
Posted by Sir Vic]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:13:21 -0800 The Stranger
As I wrote in the post, I'm not hostile the idea of a GM bankruptcy. In the least, that would afford a chance to shed debt and the shitty management team, as well as renegotiate with employees and suppliers.

For GM to eventually emerge from bankruptcy, however, will take more than this restructuring. Fundamentally, there is far too much global capacity for building cars. (I think this can be largely attributed to *other* countries propping up their nascent or old auto manufacturers.

Likely, at least one of the major US auto makers has to go. If I had the magic wand, I wouldn't do loans. I'd do a sort of shotgun marriage--combining the best parts of GM and Chrysler, liquidating the rest--with governmental loans to bridge the transition and restructuring.
Posted by Jonathan Golob]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:01:53 -0800 The Stranger Posted by smade]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 13:59:08 -0800 The Stranger
Are you being willfully obtuse?

Of course, the sort of exports that India is doing are better and more sustainable than China's. There isn't a shipping penalty for tech support or code like there is for things made of steel and aluminum. The barriers for entry to these jobs are vastly lower. It's closer to a real free market--in the Adam Smith sense of that phrase. Do I need to read Adam Smith to you?

Look at Tata Motors. It manufactures cars, in India for Indians. That's the model that works. Tata's cars are meant for the Indian market, not export.

David Wright:
The problem is, the success of the GM powertrain team has a lot to do with organization and conglomeration of many talented individuals together. Just as the success of Chrysler's design team.

Splitting up these talented people, and shoving them into other companies is unlikely to recapture what is working. Very few interesting things, today, can be accomplished by a single solitary individual. It's that organization that I think is worth saving.

Or, to put it in another way: The grouping of talent at GM's powertrain engineering team is productive and thus worth saving with governmental dollars just as we'd attempt to save a roadway by repairing a bridge.
Posted by Jonathan Golob]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 13:52:35 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Bellevue Ave]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 13:47:00 -0800 The Stranger
Gm: General Mess - The Long Run Blog

And no I'm not affiliated with The Long Run Blog, but I do frequent it, and yes this is a real inquiry and not me trying to spam links.


Posted by Josh Wittner]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 13:46:04 -0800 The Stranger
Obama should read The Stranger. Maybe he already does.
Posted by partychief]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 13:44:06 -0800 The Stranger She don't want no fed what's broke de broke.
Yeah you know GM's a gold digger.
Spend ma money on her CEO posse and them dividends for da investor homies.

Say it: WE WANT PRODUCTS! WE WANT PRODUCTS!

...

Seriously, don't make a deal, just prepay for Production of Real high-mpg cars and trucks (no SUVs) and plug-in hybrids for all US government and military needs and prime the pump with PRODUCTION!

That creates more jobs than any amount you let the former CEOs and execs steal or give to their homies who get dividends as shareholders.

(caveat - I own 400 shares of Ford)
Posted by Will in Seattle]]> Thu, 13 Nov 2008 13:41:57 -0800 The Stranger