So, I read in today's Wall Street Journal that GM is backing out of the deal to sell Opel. I have to say that it's a good idea. Several of the more innovative GM cars to come out in the US in recent years are re-branded Opels. Also, it's hard to be a global car maker if you're writing off a continent.

I'm of course disappointed that the Saturn sale fell through. I still think that if the electric car crowd wants to get serious about moving vehicles, buying Saturn was a golden opportunity. On a personal note, I own a Saturn Vue hybrid. Since I bought it on a zero percent interest and it will soon be paid for, I will be keeping it for a while, but it would be nice to not have an orphan vehicle.

I guess you win some and you loose some.

So, my friend and writer Tobias Buckell had an unanticipated personal encounter with the Canadian health care system. Needless to say, he survived, and for $480 plus cab fare, or $480 more than a Canadian would pay, he got excellent service, including CAT scans and X-rays, and a somewhat lengthy consult with a Canadian cardiologist - longer than with his US doctor, in fact. Yes, the plural of anecdote is not data, but that saying cuts both ways.

Moving on from the "all health care, all the time" focus of this blog, I see that Chevy has released the city mileage for the Chevy Volt. It will show an EPA estimate of 230 MPG. Now, there's a bit of smoke and mirrors in that number - your actual mileage will depend on how many in-city trips of less than 40 miles you take. (After 40 miles or so, the gas engine kicks in.) Still, it's quite impressive.

Of course, the fact that the Chevy Volt is anywhere near being actually built is thanks to Government intervention - saving General Motors. So, maybe Big Government can do something right. It certainly appears that Canada's government has a handle on health care. As the writer Jerry Pournelle says, "what man has done other men can aspire to do."

Perhaps these two thoughts aren't completely unrelated? ;-)

I read the Wall Street Journal online. Their politics, right to center-right, are not mine, but I do find points of interest. Two editorials caught my eye today.

GM Gets a Second Chance

The article GM Gets a Second Chance, points out that a lot of what supporters of the GM bailout said would happen has in fact happened. One key point in the article that I'd like to quote, and suggest that some of my conservative readers cut out and frame, is:

"The United Auto Workers (UAW) union gets another 17.5% which will provide health care for retired workers, taking that burden off GM.

No one really likes this, especially the UAW, which wanted cash instead of stock for the money that GM (and Chrysler too, for that matter) owed the union. But the union has to become part of the solution at GM, not part of the problem. Taking stock in the car companies was a sacrifice, not a victory, for the UAW."

The Public Option Two-step

The article The Public Option Two-step is not so accurate. It starts from a flawed premise, "The reason left-flank Democrats are so adamant about a public option is because they know it is an opening wedge for the government to dominate U.S. health care." No, the reason left-flank Democrats are so adamant about a public option is that is the only way to ensure everybody, including the poor and sick, gets covered.

As I understand it, Obama's health care program will work similarly to Medicare. Everybody has (or is eligible for) a base level of coverage. If you want and can pay for extras, you (or your employer) can go buy them. It's a simple system, and has plenty of room for private insurers and providers.

The Wall Street Journal article is also worried about "crowd-out" or the concept that cheaper public coverage will drive out private coverage. Unlike some people, at least this article doesn't try to argue that government care would be inherently bad. After all, if the care is bad, there would be an obvious market for "upscale" services.

But barely keeping my head above water. The week after a takeover is massively hectic. So how about this weather? Wet and cool - an English summer if ever I did see one.

In other news, GM sent me a letter assuring me that the company will survive bankruptcy, and included a coupon for up to $2,000 off if I buy a car by July. Thanks, guys, but the current vehicle isn't paid off yet.

Having ran clean out of profound thoughts...

This guy said everything I wanted to say about GM's bankruptcy but better then I could. (Hat tip John Scalzi.)

I replied to a post in bdunbar's blog about the Chrysler - Fiat merger, and I decided that it would make a great standalone blog entry, or at least the foundation of one. So, here goes.

Why I think the Chrysler - Fiat deal will go better than the Chrysler - Daimler deal:

1) There is a lot less overlap in products. I'm sure Fiat has some kind of van in Europe, but the company is not known for vans, trucks or SUVs.
2) Fiat has no US distributorship. So, the pressure will be on Fiat to get their cars into Chrysler's showrooms, and they won't have to worry about their existing dealership complaining.
3) Although Fiat owns Alfa-Romero, their bread-and-butter is selling cars to the masses, unlike Daimler's high-end market.

Although not a factor in the corporate deal, the UAW taking 51% of the company is not the "giveaway to the unions / Obama supporting his voters" that the press makes it out to be. Don't forget - the union was owed cash for taking over their retiree's health benefits. They still have those health obligations, and unless doctors suddenly start accepting Chrysler shares as payment, the UAW will have to reduce its stake.

So, back on December 31, I said that we would not need a "Neverending Bailout" for GM and Chrysler. It looks like I was correct. Chrysler will be forcibly merged with Fiat (coming with a $6 billion dowry, Fiat can hardly say no) and GM will either get good or get gone by the end of May. I'm not sure if GM will make a swing through bankruptcy court or not, but anybody who wants to get paid should probably take the deal they will be offered.

In other auto news, for the second time now I've used my Onstar to report an accident. Fortunately both times I was not involved. Today's crash was coming in to work - a red Toyota SUV ran a light and got creamed by a mini-van coming through the intersection. Fortunately nobody was injured.

For some reason, the old Leonard Nemoy TV show "In Search Of..." came to me this morning. Since today's post is various random thoughts, the title fits.

Regarding the auto industry 'bailout' - It looks like a lot of tough love for GM and Chrysler. One should note that the government documents specifically and repeatedly mention the word "bankruptcy." I have to agree that Chrysler is no longer viable as a stand-alone company. The Chrysler - Daimler merger will go down in history as one of the most disastrous decisions of a US company in history. My only hope is that GM will be able to get its act together.

On the writing front, two of my first readers looked at Space Rescue and got back with comments. One of the first readers made some very useful plot suggestions. She felt that the villains were, if not "too stupid to live," definitely too stupid to be a realistic challenge. I think I fixed this over the weekend, and I'll probably briefly discuss it at the next writer's group meeting.

Over on the FX channel, they are running the movie SWAT on a continuous loop, or so it seems. Although the movie has the intellectual heft of cotton candy, it's a pretty good roller-coaster ride, and I've used it to decompress a bit lately. I've noticed that the FX Channel is advertising the latest Michelle Rodriquez movie during SWAT, which is probably no accident. I did find myself thinking that Rodriquez does really seem to enjoy her acting career.

On that (not-so) profound thought, I return you to your regularly-scheduled programming.

I have my regular Rotary meeting at noon today and an evening meeting of our Rotary medical equipment committee, so not much time for blogging. But, here are two really interesting stories to read.

First, readers of this blog know my great interest in modern piracy. Well, William Langewiesche has a great article in Vanity Fair about the pirate seizure of Le Ponant last spring. It's a lengthy article, but I found it fascinating.

Second, readers of this blog also know of my preference for preventing the collapse of General Motors. Well, this article in Washington Monthly points out that the US government has a long, successful and profitable (for the taxpayers) history of bailing out US firms, including the railroads (twice), Lockheed, Chrysler and the US airline industry. It's well worth a read.

From that rag of a raging liberal newspaper, the Wall Street Journal, I read that Toyota AND Honda are applying to the Japanese government for loans. And here I thought the Japanese car companies were so much better then those dinosaur US-based firms. /end sarcasm/

So my friend and blogger jeff_duntemann had a post arguing against the Big Three auto bailout. As even casual readers will note, I have been in favor of a bailout. Well, Jeff asked the question "Apart from Chapter 11 bankruptcy, what can we do to make the Detroit automakers "sustainable"?" In other words, do we need a "Neverending Bailout?" (Jeff's words).

I don't think we need a Neverending Bailout. Contrary to popular opinion, GM is making cars people want to buy - they are still selling the most cars per year in the world. (Toyota is a close second.)

GM's problem is they have capacity for and fixed costs of a company selling a lot more cars then they do. The past several years have seen a massive attempt to reduce those fixed costs, including such things as:

- Moving retiree medical costs to the unions
- Shutting plants
- Moving to a two-tier wage scale, with new hires getting significantly less cash.

GM still needs to reduce dealerships, which may require legislation, and they may want to / need to sell Saturn and Saab. Saturn in particular might be an attractive target for some of the Silicon Valley electric car startups. Saturn has a dealership network, loyal customers, and a reputation for developing innovative stuff. But the bottom line is that GM can get into viability, given some time.

Chrysler's big problems, and the reason that GM was considering a merger with them, are:

1) Chrysler has no significant international presence. That was what the failed Daimler merger was supposed to bring to the table.
2) As part of the Daimler merger, Chrysler's new product development efforts and resources were taken over by Daimler. When Chrysler was re-spun off, Daimler kept most of that.

The business logic for a GM-Chrysler merger would be for GM to scrap plants and products, keeping basically Jeep (which sells, and which could go international) and the mini-van line, which GM is not as strong in.

I'm actually not sure that Ford is in crisis at the moment. You will recall they were not looking for actual cash, just the option to get some if needed. Ford has a strong international presence, benefits from the UAW's two-tier deal, and has a new product pipeline.

In short, I think the Big Three are fixable, although we may end up with the Big Two, plus or minus a niche company.

The good thing about living five minutes from work is that even if your commute time doubles it's not that bad. The bad thing about living five minutes from work is that bad weather is not an excuse for not coming in.

Today's news brings several items of interest, so consider this post a link-fest.

Auto bailout

I see that President Bush decided to lend the Big Three some cash. In approving the loan, Bush said something that should be obvious to anybody not living in a cave, to wit: "In the midst of a financial crisis and a recession, allowing the U.S. auto industry to collapse is not a responsible course of action."

Ya think so? What does it say for the Republican party that the only person willing to admit the obvious is an unpopular, outgoing President? I think part of the problem facing the Republicans, and this by the way is not unique to them or now, is that as a party looses power, it becomes more extreme.

What happens is this - the first people voted out of office are folks in swing districts. By definition, they are the most vulnerable to changes in mood of the electorate. They also tend to be the voice of moderation of the party, because they have to go sell decisions back home. When they are gone, the moderating influence is removed.

Fixing Our Economy

Hindsight is 20/20, of course, but Joseph Stiglitz, writing in Vanity Fair, seems to have done a good job of diagnosing how we got into our current economic mess. It's a lengthy read, but well worth your time.

Global Warming

Hard as it is to believe when one is up to one's butt in snow, but apparently global warming continues. NASA says that polar ice is continuing to melt. Now, I tend to agree with jeff_duntemann in that running an open-ended experiment in increasing CO2 in the atmosphere is a bad idea.

I also agree with Jeff that a long-term solution will have to involve nuclear power. Having said that, the first rule of messes is "don't make it bigger." Thus, conservation has a role to play.

In honor of Friday, I offer random thoughts in lieu of more substantive content:

Movies

I'm really bad about movies. I'll see a trailer, say, "yeah that looks good," and not only not get to the theater but completely forget about renting or pay-per-view. One of those movies was the Civil War drama Ride With The Devil. Well, thanks to AMC and my DVR, I watched it last night.

The story is about a group of young men in Missouri who decide to fight with the Confederate "bushwackers," which are guerrilla units. The Civil War in Missouri wasn't fought by armies, but rather family vs. family. At any rate, it's an interesting movie, with a surprising ending.

Macy's

Marshall Field's department stores were a Chicago institution, until Macy's, a New York chain, bought them out. Until I went Christmas shopping last week, I was agnostic about that transaction. Now I'm a Macy-hater.

See, Marshall Field had a department in the basement of the store nearest me where they sold gift baskets. I used to buy two - one for each of my immediate neighbors. Now that department is gone, replaced by an (unoccupied) counter proclaiming "Make Your Own Gift Basket." Sorry, Macy's, you lost my business.

Big Three Bailout

As you may have heard, the Big Three bailout was blocked in the Senate by Republicans. Anybody who had any illusions that the Republican Party gave a damn about non-rich people should be cured of that problem.

Writing

The second re-write of my latest novel Space Rescue is finished. I am sending out second copies to my alpha readers, and will be taking copies back to downstate for a couple of family members. Hopefully I can actually sell this puppy to a decent-sized publisher.

I've been on record on this blog as supporting a "bailout" of General Motors. I use "bailout" in quotes because they are asking for loans, not, as with the financial sector, "just give us a ton of cash now."

If you detect a note of irritation in the above, good. Unlike the bank bailout, GM was required to come up with a plan to actually use the money, and unlike the bank bailout, GM got yelled at for flying to Congress in private jets. There's more than a hint of double-standard there.

At any rate, GM's plan is available here for your reading pleasure. It's a summary with a link to the detailed plan. Some key points:

1) The plan works with GM auto sales of 12 million units in 2009 - below the record low 13.8 million units of 2008.

2) GM has already reduced North American costs drastically, from $39 billion in 2004 to $30 billion in 2008. Cost cutting already implemented will pull this down to $23 billion by 2012.

3) Three of the last four Car/Truck of the Year awards in the United States were awarded to GM products—the Saturn Aura, Chevrolet Silverado, and Chevrolet Malibu. In short, quality problems are resolved.

4) Hybrid development is ongoing, with the world's first production plug-in hybrid due to roll out in 2010.

Yes, I am biased. However, GM has done everything requested of it, and a hell of a lot more then the financial sector did. They're also asking for less money - $4 billion now, another $8 over 2009, and option for $6 billion if sales go below 10.5 million vehicles. So, give them the money.

I will be attending Windycon this weekend, and am on programming. It's a new hotel, so hopefully people can actually find the programming without fighting the maze of the old place. Before I go, I do have a few random thoughts:

Big Three Automaker Bailout

As I mentioned the other day, I am generally in favor of some kind of bailout. Now, I've seen this discussed on various right-wing sites, and the anti-bailout crowd's rallying cry is "remember British Leyland! For those not up on auto manufacturing history, British Leyland was what happened in 1968 with Great Britain nationalized and force-merged the two British automakers.

Nobody can argue that the resulting company managed to become a competitive automaker. It did not - not that the bailout plans so far involve a forced merger. However, what Leyland did accomplish was prevent a sudden collapse of the British auto industry, with the resulting fire-sale of assets. By keeping the factories running, Leyland was able to sell off assets in an orderly fashion at a decent price, and unwind its workforce. So, if nothing else, Leyland succeeded at cushioning the blow. I submit that a US auto industry bailout would be at least as successful.

ETA Read this article which points out that the Big Three are already well into the kinds of reforms they need to make.

US Foreign Policy

Over on Jim Wright's blog, he's got an open letter to the Obama administration regarding foreign policy. All I can say is "amen." It's a bit long, but well worth the read.

As you may have heard, the Big Three automakers (GM, Ford and Chrysler) are in serious financial trouble. Now, in a bit of full disclosure, my Dad and two of my uncles each worked 30+ years at GM, and all have pensions, so I have a vested interest in keeping GM at least afloat.

At any rate, the Big Three are looking for a financial bailout. The Wall Street Journal has an editorial out on the subject. Although they are rather more pessimistic about GM's Volt plug-in hybrid then I am, the Journal makes a good point, namely, part of the reason the Big Three are in trouble is government regulations regarding fuel efficiency.

Making fuel-efficient cars isn't really that hard. From Making Light, I read of yet another fully-operational plug-in hybrid, this one from Dean Kamen of Segway fame.

The problem is, most Americans don't want to buy a fuel-efficient vehicle. They want a big, powerful vehicle, which is why they buy SUVs. Now that gas prices have fallen to around $2 / gallon ($2.35 in DuPage county on Sunday when I filled up), public interest in hybrids will fade.

Moreover, at that low gas price, alternative fuels become less profitable. Let's not kid ourselves here - to make alternative fuels actually happen, they need to be profitable. Nobody is going to spend billions on a 10 or 20 year investment if fuel prices fluctuate 40% in a single year. That means either a government mandate to use them or a fuel tax, which is the same thing in a different color.

So, I find myself in favor of both a bailout for the Big Three and a tax to support alternative fuels.

So, I read via Lawyers, Guns and Money that the US Navy has decided it doesn't need more battleships DDG-21s. These 14,000 ton "destroyers" (the size of a WWII heavy cruiser) are proving entirely too expensive and unwieldy for real-world use. Instead, the Navy plans to build more 8,000 ton Burke-class destroyers. (8,000 tons is a WWII cruiser's weight.) Common sense has found the Admiralty.

Over the weekend, I got to ride in my neighbor's new Prius. It was surprisingly roomy inside, and tricked out with all kinds of stuff, including a backup camera. Nice, but she just got it this week after being on a wait-list since May.

I'm in meetings from 11:30 on, including a writers group this evening, so enjoy your day.

Word Count for Space Rescue
Complete (71,218) Goal (80,000)
100% complete
Since Last Post = 464 words

Things accomplished in fiction: More cleanup - now at chapter 40.

I mentioned in previous posts that a lot of folks were working on plug-in hybrids. Here’s a link to another outfit that have two Saturn Vues, converted to plug-in hybrids, tooling around town today. Now if I could just get GM to extend their factory warranty to them...

Comments about various unrelated things:

Barack Obama and Rev. Wright.

I caught tape of a couple of Wright's speeches last night. The guy's obviously intelligent, but very liberal to the point of being radical. His church, which has distributed $1.5 million in scholarship money and runs senior citizen housing, has done a lot of good.

Here's my problem. I'm a Roman Catholic. Rather out-of-practice, in truth, but I identify as a Catholic. Catholic charities have done vast amounts of good work in the world, and I attended a Catholic grade school. But I've also sat in church and heard the priest call abortion murder and tell me that I have to do something to stop it. I don't agree with that philosophy. So do I have to denounce the priest and all his works, or can I just nod politely and sit there? ETA Can I take advice from or just listen to people I don't agree with?

Plug-in hybrids

I was watching CNN this morning, and they were interviewing a couple of people who had converted a Toyota Prius to run on batteries only and get charged up via the electric grid. I can't find a link to the CNN site, but they were treating these guys like they were rocket scientists. Well, as this site suggests, all sorts of people are doing that. My suspicion is that by 2020, you'll have a hard time finding a new car on the market that's not a plug-in hybrid.

In the good timing department, I got my leaves raked before the snow started.

In the not-so-good timing, I had to drive home from the grocery store (no emergency, just a regular run) in the first blush of the snow. You know, the "slicker then snot" layer. Fortunately, I was able to take the back road and avoid most of the "OMG iz snowz - haz drive 5 miles / hour" folks. El hybrid handled the snow as expected - typical response of a front-wheel-drive vehicle.

Since this snow is supposed to change to rain, ice, sleet and back again, I decided to pick up a Home Run Inn pizza and eat in tonight.