Why is that? Because they are cheaper? or because they have features and benefits that US-made trucks do not have? 

I had this conversation with my boss this morning. It's not just about buying US to save a job or being patriotic. It's about buying what vehicle has the features and benefits at the $$ I am willing to pay.  Again, it's about having a choice of well-made goods.

We have a global economy whether we like it or not.  The catalyst of change will be our quality and efficiency of manufacturing at home.   I'm sure this will cause me to be flamed, but costs would decrease and quality would increase if the manufacturing unions could be reined in.   I'm tired of the sense of entitlement the unions seem to have.  Unions are completely out of touch with patriotism and doing what is right for the country.  They are only looking out for themselves and look where it has gotten us as a country. 

Again, I agree.  I am NOT pro-union, pro-US Made to the blind sight of anything else. I am only encouraging folks to take an active role in what their concerns are. I hear too much grumbling amongst ourselves and not enough people who are willing to take the time to find out WHO their government representatives are and where to write to them.

And... at this point in time, in the US. we've made our bed. If we let too much of it to fall, it will have a greater impact then we may be able to dig ourselves out of.   SO far as the "Big 3" "bailout".  First, it should only be for Ford and GM... since Chrysler is a privately owned company once Daimler bailed out. 

next, it's not about handing over 25 million dollars. It's about loans, with interest to be paid back. and YES, YES, YES, they MUST present a plan. 

Since you live in the PNW - If you can imagine what it would be like if the 10s of thousands of Boeing employees suddenly being out of work if the plants closed because neither US or other countries were buying aircraft because there was no credit. Houses foreclosed and simply abandoned!!; loss of property tax in the school districts and local government - yet the same amount of roads, etc. to maintain. Loss of consumers for local services and products. loss of corporate property tax and corporate support in the community.  Once houses are foreclosed or sold below loan value, then everyone else's homes become devalued. Then, if the people who hold houses that are "upside-down" in credit WANT to move, they cannot find a buyer since so many houses are for sale through foreclosure. If they sell, it's less than what the mortgage is for which means they have to come up with $20,000, $40,000, even $100,000 to pay the bank/ mortgage company to get out of the home. Now, these same people can find work elsewhere but have zero dollars for a down payment.

yup. it is.

Yup. for the most part I agree. I owned 3 VWs; 3 Datsuns (Nisson now); then a European-built Ford. When I moved to the Detroit area, I started buying Ford because I could get a huge discount through a relative. I can get steep discounts on any of the Big 3... but I stick with Ford. I do own a subcompact Chevy though.

So for me, they are cheap enough to dispose of every 2 or 3 years LOL... before the ashtray gets full!! ha ha ha... very old joke.  

* sigh* if you have been working for the government then of course you don't understand ecomonics............

anyway- buy whatever you want..thats the great thing about free trade- allow the market place to determine what should sell and what shouldn't......

I beg your pardon? Did you miss a smiley face or LOL?  I certainly hope that was an attempt at humor.

Did you ever promise to lay down your life for the good of your country? 

After I was honorably discharged with, among other things, a Commendation Medal, I worked for the DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE. With Military People - those underpaid folks who frequently have to sign up for Food stamps and other aid.

Get Off it. Just because someone works for the government doesn't make them blind to a side of an argument. I'm voicing MY opinion, my freedom of speech. YOU are making this personal.

P.S.  I haven't held a "government" job for more than 20 years. 

Well if your going out of business affected as many people as will be affected by GM and/or Chrysler going into Chapter 11...then I would say you need a bailout...it is all a matter of scale...

Technically it's not a buy out or a bail out. It's making money available in loans.

A different $25 billion in loans is through the Energy Department and was set aside so that the automakers could retool for more fuel efficient vehicles. However, if a company applies for those monies, they have to prove themselves credit-worthy - which is why GM is getting beat up so badly.

While I'm not strongly for or against advancing the money to automakers, I AM quite perturbed that the FDIC handed over more than $700 BILLION dollars to financial institutions without all the questions and finger-pointing that automakers and UAW president are facing.

I'm sorry I didn't catch every last detail, but as a for instance... Citigroup, after being bailed out, went ahead with a $400 or $500 million ad campaign which included either buying a sports/ball field or buying a sign for said sports/ball field. When questioned about it, Citigroup said that advertising was very important. What the fruitbat is THAT about? And, are the financial companies requiring their CEOs, presidents, CFOs, etc. to take $1 annual salaries? grrrrrr.

I know right after AIG and other financials were "bailed" (given guarenteed loans), there was a multitude of news items about rip off situations in the companies being bailed. So it's not just auto makers that are not looking ahead. 

I still say Chrysler needs to dealt with differently than Ford & GM since it's a privately held company and not publicly traded.

If the credit market would stabilize and confidence would come back, then people can buy cars (and houses and horse trailers) and the automakers and other manufacturing can begin to stabilize. Heck. People were spending their grocery money on gas this past summer and had nothing to spend on anything else. And then for horse people, add in hay & feed at 2x the amount 2 years ago... it's a huge complex issue. 

Ford was down 33% in sales and Toyota was down 31%. I didn't compare any others. But that shows you that it's not just US manufacturers that have lost sales and therefore, lost revenue to cover operating costs. I know that the trailer manufacturers and dealers are all feeling the same belt tightening. They are paying $$$ on warehouse, factories, property, employee taxes & wages, with nothing coming in.

But... as the OP started this... watching out for our behinds... if that's protectionism... well maybe the US needs just a tiny bit more of it by way of keeping manufacturing in the US instead of importing products manufactured elsewhere. And to do that, it means employees have to accept less pay in return for steady income.  Mortgage holders will have to tighten their belts and accept lower interest and longer payback periods so that people don't lose their homes. Slash salaries there too.

edited to correct where the money is from/for.

Yes. Second time for Chrysler; however, Lee Iacocca DID make that company profitable...  he had to. He took little or no salary but DID take incentives... so he would only make any money if the company did.

I remember "back then" when Detroit was failing like it is now... and then it was because of imports, because those were the only cars worth buying.  The automakers DID learn, but then...  the $$$ took over, once again.

"back then (1979-1981 or so)... workers left Michigan for Texas. I was in Texas and headed TO Michigan.