November 20, 2008

Michael Moore from LKL on the auto industry

Posted: 11:50 AM ET

We talked with Michael Moore on Larry King Live.  The filmmaker's deep ties to the auto industry start with his father, who worked for General Motors for 35 years.

In 1989, Moore became an international figure for his film, "Roger and Me," which centered on the declining auto industry in his hometown of Flint, Michigan and the ripple effect on the town's residents.

Michael Moore: When I made that film, there were still 50,000 people working at General Motors in Flint. I mean they had eliminated 30,000 jobs, but there were still some jobs there.

Today, I think there's less than 12,000 working in the area, so it has devastated Flint. Flint was one of the first towns to go. When I made that movie almost 20 years ago, I hoped that the film would be a warning to other cities that this corporation was intent upon removing jobs from this country and taking them to Mexico and Brazil and other places.

(Read More here)

What did you think of the interview ??  Weigh in here!!

Filed under: Economy • Larry King Live • Michael Moore

Share this on:
Darren W (Irvine Ky)   November 20th, 2008 11:55 am ET

Dear Larry,
I now know why Ive got to pay $20000+ for a car that should cost nomore than $10,000. Someones got to pay for those corp. jets. It must be nice to beable to fly around in your own jet. I live in a house that doesnt have running water. I dont watch tv becouse I cant afford to get it installed to my home. It wouldnt matter anyways becouse I dont have a tv that works, thank god for I dont have a phone although I do have the internet, but, I dont know for how long. The only luxery I have is my PC. I bought it when things were better.It really makes me sick to hear of these corp big wigs asking for money when thier flying around in jets at a cost of $20,000 per person per flight. Now thier asking for a bailout!? Heres an ideal, cut wages in half, accross the board. Kick the unions out if they dont like it. Beleave me thiers a bunch of folks that would take up thiers jobs if they dont. Price a car where comman folks can afford them. All the money in the world isnt going to help the automakers if noone can afford to buy thier products. Ive been in a few automakers plants before. I went into a Ford plant in Ohio one time. What I saw in there was unbeleavable. TVs on every post in the building playing HBO. What does that cost and whos is paying for it. We are, the consumer. Maybe its time for the "Big 3" to go the way of the"T Rex" and let something smarter take over.

George   November 20th, 2008 11:56 am ET

Greetings this is an honor and pleasure! I come before you in dire help as American that is extremely disappointed in our U.S. Government.

I first would like to say I agree with Congress about the bailout of the American Automotive Companies. No bailout should be given unless the Automotive Companies and the UAW are willing to make major concessions along with a reorganization of their executive level staffers. However it is extremely hypocritical for any form of our U.S. Government to criticize corporations in the private sector for mismanagement, excessive spending, and misappropriation of funds. Our Government is as guilty of this for far longer and at a much higher cost to tax payers. You see private sector companies misappropriate funds earned by profit unlike our government who is willing to mismanage and misappropriate our hard earned tax paying dollars. Granted the consumer still suffers when profit is misappropriated, but at least that capital was earned by providing products and services and not capital that was earned simply by collecting from the taxpayers.

That being said my point is simple, if our government wants to criticize the Automotive Companies than I simply suggest they back up their criticism and lead by example. I am certain that our government can and should make major concessions especially in these tough economic times. My thoughts are that in the very near future there will be an inauguration for President elect Barrack Hussein Obama, lets start here with the concessions and eliminate the excessive spending that will occur for this lavish event. These people that are directly responsible for our worse economic crisis since the 1920's will be lavished with fine wines, foods, and gifts and are catered too in ways most Americans will never know or experience. If you want to use the argument that this event is paid for by contributions and donations and not by taxpayer dollars then again I say lead by example. Forgo the lavish event and assist the American people that will benefit more from the funds than a bunch of fat, happy, and rich politicians that do not deserve there excessive salaries and other benefits that again most Americans will never know or experience.

Talk about out of touch with reality, if I recall this was a talking point for the Democrats in this past election. It amazes me that our U.S. Government would be willing to move forward without hesitation with this extremely expensive and lavish event while our nation suffers in despair.

I will assume this falls on deaf ears as most the media in this country has made it very clear that they are in the tank for Obama. Which would be an absolute disappointment as I see this as very news media worthy and certainly something the American people should have the opportunity to decide. So I challenge you simply, rebuild your integrity with the American people, report the suggestion I have made in the media and provide a fair and balanced polling center on your website and let the American people decide. I suggest this, as I am certain our government will not be willing to make this and future concessions that they themselves expect the Automotive Companies to comply too!


Nelson   November 20th, 2008 12:11 pm ET

So let me get this straight; as a tax payer I'm responsible for keeping the promises made by big corporations to their employees? GM promised their retirees health care for life, not the tax payers. When the economy is strong, big companies are private sector when the economy is weak, they are public/government sector? The same goes for the Airlines. Let’s pick one and stick to the model. We can’t have it both ways because it’s simply not fair. Case in point: what do you tell the tax payer that can’t afford good health insurance but is bailing out big corporations so their employees can have stellar health insurance? When is our Government going to learn from the past bailouts?

“Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me!”


hugh ~ california   November 20th, 2008 12:13 pm ET

I agree with Michael Moore for the most part, but when will the media address the bail money bonus senario? We were already duped once, let's not let it happen again. Any corporation facing financial collapse and asking for federal aid should not be allowed to give out bonuses, and the salaries starting at the top should be cut in half–at the very minimum–for the next two or three years.

Peter   November 20th, 2008 12:15 pm ET

I think the idea of Mr. Moore to use companies like GM to help building up a better infrastructure is the right way. By doing this you could save a lot of jobs that would be at risk and you could make a step towards a greener country. But in my opinion it would be very hard for US citizens, because I think they would loose a bit of their way of life.
I´m very happy that the awareness for sustainable development has become more important in the United States, and that the world sticks together to fight global warming.
So bailout the 3 automakers, sell their private jets, and let them help to build public transport.

Rose   November 20th, 2008 12:44 pm ET

As long as we tolerate enormous payouts to management for doing their jobs with reckless disregard, we will continue to have similar situations. How is it that CEO's are running off with tens of $millions in compensation when they have lost $billions for their company? No accountability. They were actually rewarded for a job poorly done. Plans poorly conceived and executed. Warnings unheeded. Pockets lined to an astounding extent.

This can only occur in a reverse-universe where greedy CEO's roam free without question. This entire decade was full of similar abuse. Where is the government?

Thanks Michael Moore for speaking up since 1989. We are listening to you again, albeit too late. Will deaf ears prevail? If the auto companies want $25b in bailout, it must be with severe conditions as to what they can and will build – and where it will be built.

Luis   November 20th, 2008 12:56 pm ET

I live in México, and down here GM sells their Opel cars rebranded as Chevrolet. They are smaller indeed, but they are fuel eficient and very well designed (German, after all). Chrysler sells a lot of Hyundais and Ford uses some of their brithish models. They could pretty easely reconvert their producction into better quality cars without having to invest a lot in development. The cars already exist, but they don´t want to sell them in the US because being smaller cars, they got to sell them for less. Money as always.

Patsy George   November 20th, 2008 1:06 pm ET

I am sick & tired of the arrogant & greedy CEO'sof the auto industry flying in their private jets and drawing their outrageous salaries and HAVING THE NERVE TO BEG FOR MONEY- WHEN WILL SOMEBODY STAND UP FOR THE STRUGGLING WORKING CLASS CITIZENS WHO ARE IN FEAR OF LOSING OUR JOBS EVERYDAY!!!!!

Joe DiComo   November 20th, 2008 1:12 pm ET

Hi Larry,

I was wondering why no one has mentioned anything about big oil companies like Exxon Mobil providing incentive loans to the big 3 automakers. Exxon has posted record profits more than 10 billion per quarter for years. It seems to me that they are probably one of the automakers biggest stake holders. One would think that they would provide loans for R&D and production of vehicles that use alternative fuels that Exxon & Others should be working on producing.


Kris Selka   November 20th, 2008 1:16 pm ET

One more thing about the ONE MILLION BAILOUT FOR CITIZENS Larry.
Those who don't have debts or homes maybe for the first time in their life they would be able to own one so real estate market would move and so on
Kris Selka

Linda - Detroit   November 20th, 2008 1:23 pm ET

Michael Moore was a disappointment last night! It was his mixed endorsement for financial help for the beleaguered American auto industry that was a surprise. All the hoopla about the private corporate jets was a smoke screen to distract attention from what should be discussed. Sure it is expensive to operate these jets, but the time of these three CEO's is even more valuable...I'll bet they haven't been getting much sleep of late either. Their safety and security is paramount to their corporations...can you imagine sitting in Coach class with any of them??

Larry, it is about time you got somebody from the industry who can truthfully tell what efforts that have been made by the Big 3 - they have not been resting on their laurels and watching "Rome" burn. Case in point, Ford Motor and Bill Ford in particular took aggressive action two years ago to get Alan Mulally (the Boeing executive who is credited with that corporation's turnaround). Besides the well publicized plant closings, UAW concessions, benefit reductions for both current employes and retirees, the white-collar salaried staffs have been trimmed to the bone, Mr. Mulally prudently got his lines of credits last year to "batten the hatches" for this unforeseen and unprecedented economic calamity - a move GM probably failed to do and is now in dire straits for cash.

Again, what a mistake it was for Congress to hand out over a trillion dollars to the financial industry with few requirements and thus far NO RESULTS. Another $25 Billion is nothing in the scheme of things and could help prevent the untold misery that will be heaped upon millions of Americans. Give the Big 3 the money they need with reasonable conditions and not regret it in the near future.

kevin fuller   November 20th, 2008 1:25 pm ET

Stop blaming American workers and their Labor Unions for the collapse of our industry. Both the auto and banking industries failures are due to coorprate greed. CEO's earning millions and giving themselves bonuses ; while their workers give conscessions year after year.Government should give them the loan under conditions similiar to the ones that they shoved down the workers throats during their last contract. Make them take early retirements and buyouts and hire replacements at half the wages.

Leandro Silva   November 20th, 2008 1:26 pm ET

Dear Larry.
I don't understand why the American people get so complicated with things. Regarding the big three bailout, let the Government Invest 25 B in preferred shares in the three BIG CAR makers and take control as just one more preferred shareholder, in this situation most likely it would be a mayority shareholder and the people of America through their special representatives could run the company and manufacture what is good for the country and the world. Do not just give them the money. They have shown time after time that they just don't get it.
Once the Co. is profitable, the Government can slowly sell the shares and recoup their investment.
Isn't this smarter than just have the poor give money to the rich?

Dave of Detroit   November 20th, 2008 1:34 pm ET

One-I want Congress to ask Paulson and the Financial Bailouts of companies like AIG the same Management or lack thereof questions that were asked of the Big Three! Two-I want Congress to get out of the Blank Check business all together( unless it's their own personal checkbook!) Three-Congress should inform the big three that they are going to review all aspects of our Treaties including NAFTA as the Trade Balance has to be rectified before the U.S. goes Bankrupt1 Four-Congress should realize that if the Nation's average wages continue to sink that eventually it will impact the salaries of our Legislators!

robert   November 20th, 2008 1:34 pm ET

they are not providing any quality,to me that is the biggest problem

Randy Alexander   November 20th, 2008 1:41 pm ET

Mr. King: While watching your program last night, I couldn't help wondering why pressure isn't put on the oil industry to bail out the car companies. It's clearly in their best interest and they can certainly afford it. The profits from one quarter at Exxon/Mobile would suffice.

Tina   November 20th, 2008 1:49 pm ET

After reading opinions from people living in other parts of the country (i.e. Anna, Ohio), it appears as though the sentiment is let these automakers fall. They are correct in pointing out that a company like Honda, has been successful in producing and managing for years, as a result, helping the local economies and the working class.

On the contrary, executives at GM, Ford, and the rest of the fun bunch have proven they are not capable. These automakers have access to some of the best technology and workers in the industry. They produce eco-friendly cars for other countries, yet do not market or sell them in the US.

In agreement with another blogger, why don't the oil companies who have such a high stake, offer incentive loans to these automakers since they are drowning in wealth? Or may I ask, are they in bed together to continue producing gas guzzlers for the nation to continue consuming at these alarming rates?

Either way, no bailout should be allowed. Need I remind everyone, that a loan given by the taxpayers, is only a "loan" if it is repayed. These automakers have proven they do not have the motivation, plan, or willingness to make any substantive changes from the top down, that will guarantee a profit and ultimately re-pay the loan. By giving this money, we could just procrastinate the inevitable bancruptcy and still lose the $25b. This should raise a red flag to everyone.

We are almost guaranteed to hit harder times over the next few years, however the US is resilient, and I pray we will re-emerge with a stronger economy with honesty at it roots.

Tina   November 20th, 2008 1:52 pm ET

One more thing, I loved Michael Moore on the show last night, it is good to know there are people like him out there that have a pair.

Heu Khiung   November 20th, 2008 2:01 pm ET

I just watched Michael Moore -Auto Bailout on LKL. Wow..! He got it right!!!

My name implies I am Asian and yes, I have lived in the United States for 30 years. During that time span, I have never bought any American car except one year, when my wife and I decide to buy a 90's Dodge Caravan. My oh my... that was a mistake. The door bell went berserk on the highway; the driver door hinge broke which left the door hanging and about to fall off. All sorts of electronic problems.

See. All my American friends buy only Japanese cars – Honda civic and Toyota camry. They are smart like Michael Moore stated in the vidoe. We want a car that last and have a good return on our "hard earn cash".

As Asian, I am willing to help out the America economy, if the big 3 auto maker builts car that have good milegage and good quality. Cut the crap of heavy advertisment on TV and marketing. It has not worked for the last 20 years. Of course, I want this nation to prosper because I live here on American soil.

I hope Obama can get this mess cleaned up. My 2 cents...

Judy Zodda   November 20th, 2008 2:11 pm ET

Dear Larry,

I am writing in response to Roger Moore's appearance on your show last night and the current state of the auto industry. Davd Halberstam wrote a book in 1986, "The Reckoning", specifically about the Big 3, with predictions about what is now on our doorstep with these companies. While I have not read the book in its entirety, the book is especially relelvant in light of what has recently occurred with the Big 3 who have the gall to ask Congress to bail them out.Here are some revealing quotes from the book. The very first paragraph in the book:

"There had been plenty of warnings. Some experts had pointed out the sources of oil were not limitless, that consumption was rising faster than production. Some noted that certain oil-producing countries were politically unstable and hostile to the United States. The men of the auto industry had never heed the warnings. They dismissed them as veiled criticisms of the cars they were making.
In June 1973, a young man named Charley Maxwell flew from New York to Detroit to talk to the top executives of the three main auto companies. A decade later astute observers would mark that particular time, mid-1973, as the last moment of the old order in the industrailized world....In those days no one talked about energy conservation except a few scholarly types....When Charley Maxwell started talking about energy...his judgments were clearly devoid of bias. He seemed to pursue the truth with so much intensity he made other men nervous.
In those June days of 1973, however, he was not yet well known outside his field, and his field was not yet a hot one....Americans believed that their own domestic supplies of oil were plentiful and that there were virtually limitless sources in the Persian Gulf. What Charley Maxwell intended to tell the top-level auto executives he believed he would meet in Detroit was what he had been tellinghis superiors for some time now- that there would soon be dramatic, indeed revolutionary, changes in the price of energy.
Maxwell had seen this coming for years. As early as 1970, he had started using the word "energy crisis" – apparently his coinage" He, of course goes on to say much more.

So now the Big 3 finds itself 22 years after this was written, in the morass it is now in and wants the govenment to bail them out. I am personally torn, as I don't want to see millions lose their jobs, but feel these grubby, greedy men at the top need to be removed, and if the American people are to give them any money at all, then we need to do it with lots of strings attached to force them into developing and building the type of cars that are "green" and also energy efficient. The profits, of course will be lower, (which is of course, why they don't want to do it), but the heyday of the last several decades for the Big 3 is permanantly over.
I am glad that President – elect Obama looks to our past to guide us in the future. Davd Halberstam's book may be another look into the past he may want to consider reading as another step in moving us forward.

adam pa   November 20th, 2008 2:21 pm ET

Given a choice between American and Foreign product with equal value I will always choose the American. How bad there product must be when ties go to you and you still lose market share. The sum of bailout is somewhere above 25 billion. How many cars is that? 10 million. Why would the US government give away 25+ billion to build cars no one can afford to buy? Instead buy 10 million cars. Not just any car but only ones from the big 3 that get over 30 mpg. That will inject the needed stimulus to keep those production lines humming. So what do we do with that many cars? Here some ideas on how to distribute.
1. National lottery
2. Every living Vet
3. Government agencies, Schools, Parks, Police, Fire, Charity orgs, Church’s.
A trickle up approach will stimulate not just the big 3 but all aspects of supply chain. Additionally a much needed improvement in overall national MPG averages will occur. The injected false demand will supply the capital to retool lines to higher MPG cars.

George   November 20th, 2008 2:25 pm ET

dear larry,
i believe that the oil companies should be putting up the majority of the bailout money for the big three us automakers because they pay millions to inventors of alternative fuels to cease their productions, and continue their corrupt ways. i thought it was criminal for ford to put the "excursion" into production: a huge gas guzzling suv that get's less than 10 miles to the gallon! absolutely criminal...
it's ironic how the japanese automakers are not going bankrupt, because their cars are low-maintenance and are built practically bulletproof. why is bmw and porsche not going bankrupt?

jerry reedy   November 20th, 2008 2:43 pm ET

Larry, as always a great interview of Michael Moorer. I was just a little disapointed as why you didn't ask Michael what make of vehicle he drove. Also, let's bring in Jesse Ventura, and ask him if this is the time to start the revolution!!
jerry reedy
Warren, michigan

Joshua   November 20th, 2008 2:56 pm ET

I don't know what is worse, the US auto industry about to fail or the arrogant CEO's of those companies flying to Washington to ask for my tax money in their private jets. I think it is absolutely disgusting the way they have gone about things thus far. I think each and everyone of those CEOs should be fired because they have obviously failed at their job. If they were anywhere near good at their job, they wouldn't be holding a tin cup in a 3 piece suit. The government needs to bail them out, mainly because of the ripple effect it would have on the rest of the economy. I don't work in the auto industry, but I know I would be able to feel the effects of millions of lost jobs in various different fields. I think they should have to give up a large portion of their salaries in the prior years. Why should an executive make $15 million dollars a year when he can't see what the people want in a car. How can they make that much money, knowing they have the technology to produce much more fuel efficient cars than they have been. These guys are just as greedy as the the corrupt executives on Wall Street. I really don't see how they can even sleep at night, considering what they have already done. The government needs to take CONTROL of these companies until it gets better. These incompetent guys that actually call themselves CEOs are a disgrace to the business world. Like Michael Moore was saying, they need to be told what to make and how to make it. Then they want to sit on capitol hill and think it is normal to fly a private jet to ask for my tax money. I am in favor of a bailout if these executives have nothing to do with the money that is given. I would be in favor if there was complete government control over this money that the taxpayers have no say in giving up. I would be in favor of a bailout if these oblivious so-called CEOs would sell their ridiculous private jets and actually show that they want to reduce costs. Flying to DC in a private jet for approx. $20,000 per person is hardly cutting costs. There should be a lot of oversight so these guys don't spend our tax dollars like AIG. Speaking of, why haven't these guys been investigated with an electron microscope? This government and economy is making me sick and I guess I have to thank all the greed and corruption between our government and capitalism.

Mitch Mayberry   November 20th, 2008 3:13 pm ET

To those who oppose to Auto Industry Bail out;

In a perfect world of Capitalism only the strong survive and business takes care of itself. But those are not the ground rules we have been playing under. The government has controlled and mismanaged the credit markets with the introduction of the Community Reinvestment Act and followed it up with deregulating and miss managing
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the point that our credit system almost collapsed. Add to that the deregulation of the futures market that allowed oil to hit $147.00 per barrel and started a consumer driver recession. It is the governments fault, they caused the problem and they should stand good to fix it. Gm has been in a restructure program for the last several years that should reach a majority of it’s
goals by 2010. I’m talking about moving the legacy cost of the retirees to the UAW, which with other cuts and changes would drastically improve Gm’s underlying cost per vehicle. Some say that GM built gas guzzler SUV’s and trucks that the public didn’t want, but that was untrue, an out right lie. They were built due to demand for such vehicles, look at your local Toyota lot and see the number of full size V-8 trucks and SUV’s. Toyota saw the demand and was trying to tap into that large market. It was $4.00 a gallon gas that killed it in less than a month and no company can change production over in less than 6 months and retool especially with the availability of loans
gone. The government subsidized these large vehicles with large tax credits for business owners and drove the demand even higher. Another government screw up. We pay more to other countries in the form of aid to help with our security. Those opposed to helping out our manufacturing base survive the screw ups of the government should ask themselves who will build the tanks and planes the next time we need them. It makes me sick to my stomach to see supposedly grown men and women play these political games and argue over the fate of millions of worker’s future when they caused the problem to begin with. It’s time for our elected officials to get off their, he said she said, politically driven backsides, accept the responsibility that they know is their’s and fix this short term problem. For the rest of you generating an income off of the volatile market ups and downs and enjoy profiting from a company crashing, get a real job and contribute to society and quit being the vultures you have become.

Mitch Mayberry

Dan Lehmann Dayton, OHIO   November 20th, 2008 3:20 pm ET

The goverment involvement is ruining this country with the 700B bailout and the potential auto bailout. The USA won't end if these buisnesses fail!!! These buisnesses just want to try to scare the money out of us. I am not stupid. When GM or whoever goes under, someone else will buy the assets and the company will still run it will just have another name. Look when you fail at anything in life there are consequenses...PERIOD. All these bailouts do is prolong the inevetible. Look if we are giving 700B loans to failed buisnesses, OK, then I want all taxpayers to get a 700B bailout as well. 4 or 5 thousand dollars will eliminate my family debt and chang my life. I am red in the face and mad that nobody cares what the taxpayers think! We are not fact I am utterly insulted. If these companies are so bad then they need to be turned over to someone else. Thank you for your time.

ed kelley   November 20th, 2008 3:24 pm ET

an i reporter named MIKE JOHNSON is reporting that after the bail outs that GM and CHRYSTLER will merge than SELL TO CHINA ,he also is reporting that chysler is 80% owned by a invest ment company owned by current and ex politicians and their friends!like ex VP Dan Quale!!this means that these companies wont even be U.S. owned when its all said and done

kay lombardo   November 20th, 2008 3:31 pm ET

I missed last night's show but the others that I have watched on the "bail out" makes me feel that no one is looking at the problem completely. It seems everyone wants things to continue as they were; ceo's and heads of company like AIG want to continue spending as though we weren't in a crisis. Chrysler felt no need to create better cars to compete with Toyota. Unions want to continue getting high benefits rather than take some hits (like the majority of us) and save their jobs and have an income, even with less benefits. People who should never have been given a mortgage because they couldn't afford it shouldn't expect to keep those homes at the expense of everyone else. Even Suze Orman states this. We are in a bad way and unless we are all willing to accept the losses we are experiencing and join together to be part of the solution it won't get better. Thomas Friedman's comments about the government taxing gasoline after 911 now makes sense. The depression of 1929 didn't have people expecting the government to rescue them from pain; the government had to come up with programs to help those who were willing to help themselves as best they could. I hope to hear this aspect addressed on the show.

Eric J.C. TN   November 20th, 2008 3:38 pm ET

Why bailout the big 3 that has outsourced AMERICAN jobs to other countries, make non-fuel friendly cars, unreliable above certain mileage, etc..They have not kept up with the times and have been asleep at the wheel while the foreign market has seen progress and growth for many years. Let them fall. They outsource american jobs and turn families lives upside down, and we don't need them anyway.

Inderjit Tanjal-Khanna   November 20th, 2008 3:41 pm ET

I moved to Dallas 9-1/2 years ago from Montreal, Canada.
Montreal has one of the finest transportation systems in the world – subways, buses and trains – the whole city is very well connected. Why can't USA have a system like this?

SAKIMA   November 20th, 2008 3:51 pm ET


Jumbo Joe From NYC !!!!!!   November 20th, 2008 4:02 pm ET


1st of all no BAILOUT for any corporation from tax payers money.
As per President BUSH which he believes in FREE MARKET right?
and these all corporation had done business accordingly FREE MARKET right? so they should take a lost as FREE MARKET too.
and about those 2 plus Millions auto workers Jobs take a pink slip and file for Unemployment benifits. just like other millions of americans which they loose there jobs everyday and they don't go to
capitol hill and cry about it. Auto workers start hunting for another job,
i am sure you all people find your way at some place. good luck to all of them.

rick in pa   November 20th, 2008 4:09 pm ET

Hey Larry. Where does one go as a god fearing, caring human being and the corporate leeching end. One has to take a stand on one side or the other of the auto loan issue. As all of the world knows, we are a capitalist nation. So, as capitalist we are on a premise of free market. If allowed to be given the funds requested, this is directly and indirectly helping the employees and their families. I do not work for the automobile industry or distributors. We have a handicapped child, where is the help me and my family need through these economics times? Am I being discriminated against because I do not work on Wall Street, Financial Institution, Auto Manufacturer or because I can pay my mortgage and associated bills without anything left for the month? I am not asking for sympathy or empathy. Yes, perhaps I should be grateful that I do have a job to provide for me and my families necessities but I'm not, I'm blessed. Human beings are remarkable creatures, they are resilient.

B Hunsicker - PA   November 20th, 2008 4:13 pm ET

I can't understand the difficulty that legislators in Washington have in making a loan to the Big Three with a lot of conditions-equity holding, oversight, sitting on the board of directors, etc. And also limiting the CEO's extensive bonus'. I believe it is a no-brainer to loan the Big Three $25B to tide them over 'til they can get fuel efficient models to the showroom and save jobs for a couple million people and their families. ESPECIALLY SINCE WE SPEND $25B IN IRAQ IN 2 1/2 MONTHS WITH LITTLE CHANCE OF GETTING ANY BACK.

Also, like a Representative from MI said, a loan to the to Big Three will help the middle class Americans, where a bailout of the investment house did little for the working people.

Jumbo Joe From NYC !!!!!!   November 20th, 2008 4:30 pm ET


Yesterday when i saw 3 big Auto CEO's begging for money front of congress. 1st they looked like old ripped BANANA. so they got a go
they need new fresh face from 21st century MBA Graduate person.
can you believe this..CHRYSLER CEO say he is ready to work for $1.00 a year and thats nice of him and other 2 dumm butt said NO.
they go a go ASAP.

As an American Citizen i always look after my America. why these
American Corporations never look after America?? if they don't look
after America thats mean they don't have any rights to do business in
America and they don't deserve American Goverment's Tax/Business/
Import/Export duties benifits.

American people will survive with out them and we all American will
create another few auto industry in matter of time.

Gip, FL   November 20th, 2008 4:33 pm ET

I love hearing Michael Moore, the Media doesnt cover him enough, and too bad he wasnt on for the whole hour. He does get to the facts better than most CNN pundits. I hope he goes after the Banks and Wall Street now on where all the TARP money has gone and the Ceo's who still got their money.

How the TARP money will need to be 3 trillion by end of 2010??

50% more homes to be foreclosed and 70% ARM mortgages have not reset yet. That doesnt include more home loss from 25% unemployment rate by end of 2010.

Again we give money to the top, and not to the bottom.

Anyone have any idea of where jobs are going to come from for 50 million Americans ????

Fed says 7.5% unemployment in 2009, thats usually 2.5 pts to low, now that the people actually collecting the checks. 50 Million Americans who work , are not eligible for unemployment, oh baby , this is about to get real !! Depression Times!!!

Eric J.C. TN   November 20th, 2008 4:34 pm ET

Why not take those billions and give it equally to the tax payers, at least we can have something to show for where it went. After all aren't we and our younger generation the ones that are going to pay for it. Give it to us for a Christmas bonus, bail out those who are laidoff and without jobs. Quit giving our money to countries that don't even like us and use it to help our own.

BG   November 20th, 2008 4:36 pm ET

Thank You Larry King

Food for thought: re Michael Moore / Detroit

From Merriam-Webster dictionary – definitions

Pronunciation: \ˈka-pə-tə-ˌliz-əm, ˈkap-tə-, British also kə-ˈpi-tə-\ Function: noun Date: 1877
an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

Pronunciation: \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\ Function: noun
Date: 1837
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Pronunciation: \ˈkäm-yə-ˌni-zəm, -yü-\ Function: noun Etymology: French communisme, from commun common
Date: 1840
a: a theory advocating elimination of private property
b: a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed
a: a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
b: a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production
c: a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably
d: communist systems collectively

Pronunciation: \ˈli-bər-tē\ Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural lib·er·ties Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French liberté, from Latin libertat-, libertas, from liber free — more at liberal
Date: 14th century
1: t The quality or state of being free:
a: the power to do as one pleases
b: freedom from physical restraint
c: freedom from arbitrary or despotic control
d: the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges
e: the power of choice
a: a right or immunity enjoyed by prescription or by grant : privilege
b: permission especially to go freely within specified limits
3: an action going beyond normal limits: as
a: a breach of etiquette or propriety : familiarity
b: risk, chance
c: a violation of rules or a deviation from standard practice
d: a distortion of fact
4: a short authorized absence from naval duty usually for less than 48 hours
sy synonyms see freedom
— at liberty
1: f free
2: a at leisure : unoccupied

Pronunciation: \ˈkȯ-shən\ Function: noun Etymology: Latin caution-, cautio precaution, from cavēre to be on one's guard — more at hear
Date: 1566
1 : warning, admonishment
2 : precaution
3 : prudent forethought to minimize risk
4 : one that astonishes or commands attention
— cau·tion·ary \-shə-ˌner-ē, -ne-rē\ adjective

Pan·do·ra's box
Pronunciation: \pan-ˈdȯr-əz-\ Function: noun
Etymology: from the box, sent by the gods to Pandora, which she was forbidden to open and which loosed a swarm of evils upon humankind when she opened it out of curiosity
Date: 1579
: a prolific source of troubles

Pronunciation: \ˈkȯ-shəs\ Function: adjective
Date: 1614
: marked by or given to caution
— cau·tious·ly adverb
— cau·tious·ness noun
synonyms cautious, circumspect, wary, chary mean prudently watchful and discreet in the face of danger or risk. cautious implies the exercise of forethought usually prompted by fear of danger . Circumspect suggests less fear and stresses the surveying of all possible consequences before acting or deciding . wary emphasizes suspiciousness and alertness in watching for danger and cunning in escaping it . Chary implies a cautious reluctance to give, act, or speak freely .

I say be very, very, very cautious…think before jumping…

The country needs to help foster good paying jobs within all industries, not just autos

Company executives, and the investors behind them, need to stop being so critically shortsighted and must help to preserve and to create and foster good paying manufacturing jobs in America, helping sustain their own futures by helping people sustain their lives within good employment, where they buy the products and where they invest their income and their retirements in those company stocks, too.

What goes around comes around, if not today it will tomorrow. We reap what we sow.

America didn’t achieve becoming the greatest economic power on earth within providing fast food services nor can it maintain a reasonable standard of living for it’s citizens and generations to come offering fast food pay and fast food benefits.

Corporate America has to rid itself of it’s Al “hatchet or chainsaw” Dunlaps, it’s ruthless gurus of instant share holder profit, the ideals devastating America, and get back it’s Andrew Carnegies…it’s Henry Fords, Walter P. Chryslers and maybe poignantly it’s William Durants, the founder of G.M willing to risk and losing his personal fortune trying to stop the stock market collapse of the twenties, his successor Alfred P. Sloan Jrs’ taking the helm and building G.M. into the worlds once largest industrial corporation, these builders of an American industry and within helping support the foundation, growth, wherewithal and strength of it’s, America’s, greatest capacities, these companies helping to preserve liberty for America and abroad during world war II, advancing American society through their economic growth, providing good employment for countless individuals and their supply chain and displaying good corporate morality.

Peoples demands have driven these manufacturers to keep producing larger and fancier autos and suv’s, even within the imports, too, but high fuel prices, the credit crisis and pure old fashioned fear has stifled the industry, and the auto industry is not alone.
Try selling your power boat, or your home.

The American auto industry is in trouble, it needs assistance, it needs to see credit availability for consumers, it needs to see the overall economy stabilize and see more sales of cars, trains, buses, military vehicles, parts, etc., but does it really need political government that can’t balance it’s own debt to take over or control it’s management operations?

Of course, these companies should have done a better job marketing and manufacturing more fuel efficient or alternative energy vehicles, if just to assure spreading their risks, and not to keep all their eggs in one basket. And how many parts of every American automobile are still made in America. Answer that question. Try buying a brake rotor from an auto parts store, the ones I’ve seen are made in China.

The people should have been smart enough to know fuel prices were going to skyrocket one day, and purchased less of the gas guzzlers. C’mon, how many times do you walk right into that same whole in the ground?

The banks should have been more responsible making loans, they encouraged balloon loans and risking the security of our financial institutions. The elected representatives, the politicians responsible for removing banking industry protections and promoting unsafe credit investments, if still holding public office, should be ostracized publicly and forced to be removed from office, there actions greatly risking our countries financial stability and yes, national security.

Our government’s continued irresponsibility since the 1970’s, especially after the first major oil embargo, for not assuring continuing alternative – sustainable U.S. made energy development / replacement within plausible, environmentally friendly and safe new energy sources, is nothing less than unconscionable.
Biofuels, alcohol, solar, tidal, hydroelectric, wind, environmentally friendly waste conversion processes, etc. are all increasingly viable.
Continued inaction has damaged our economy, compromised our national security and fostered terrorism. There should have been a steadfast absolute commitment, but every time fuel prices dropped, efforts were again shelved. Will it just happen all over again?.

People can purchase stock in companies producing in America, or companies producing more of their products offshore. They have a free choice within a free enterprise system.

They can do the same with every product they purchase, well, except of course for the products we no longer produce in America, which tragically, are now many.
Try buying a T.V., VCR or Camera made in America, and where are those jobs?.
What has this and is this costing us now, and what will it eventually cost down the road to our society if we continue this path?

People can help assure America is a great place to live for their grandchildren, or choose to keep shooting themselves in their own feet, within the companies and products they choose to purchase, or to invest their money with.
Company executives can do the same, they have that free choice, too, for their influence in what their market is evolving into and may be becoming for the generations to come.

The credit crisis has to be resolved as fast as possible, if people can’t get loans to buy cars, you’re not going to fix Detroit, nor fix the looming problems in housing, building, construction, etc.
Try getting a home equity loan now if your credit isn’t A-1, even if you have sufficient equity, or finding a purchaser who can get a mortgage to buy your home. The credit markets are absolutely stifled.

Where are the best answers?.

Michael Moore said on your program “we’re seeing the end of capitalism, the end of capitalism as we know it, and I say good riddance, it hasn’t helped the people or the planet”


He said his father had made a good living in the auto industry, and had provided well for his family, didn’t he?. Wasn’t that income from jobs created within capitalism, As is everybody who holds a job with an American based company, today.
Wasn’t it that terrible capitalistic society, and the brave heroes serving it who stopped Hitler and saved quite a few million peoples lives worldwide?.

C’mon Michael!

Mr. Moore’s sentiments regarding the greed of the current industry executives certainly have merit, especially with failing companies, layoffs and them showing up in their corporate jets asking for funding, and yes, I don’t think they get it. And we all witnessed that with AIG and all the others before, too.

But the answer surely isn’t in the demise of capitalism, I think the underlying answers are in the restoration of our fundamental morality as a people or nation and our common senses, within political, corporate, economic institutions and the individual citizens, and of course the media, too.

Certainly everyone, individuals, elected representatives and corporate entities each have their own fair share of blame to hold.

I think the start should be in finding the most expeditious methods to get our country back on track as soon as possible, credit first, grease the wheels, federally back loans, maybe 75-80 percent guarantees, not give aways nor free rides, due diligence, prudent making loans with banks for presented business plans, make sure the guarantees are helping America preserve employment, not getting executives giant bonuses or creating employment in shanghai, that’s just my opinion,
But why can’t they get together the best business leaders, hopefully successfully growing businesses from making their products in America, together with the countries most sophisticated think tanks and really help develop solutions and work these problems out for the long run…really learn from our history, our mistakes, and not just move on instant political shock interest and the likes of 700 billion stabs in the dark…aren’t we as a people and a nation wise enough to do that?…and smart enough to do what it takes now to preserve this great Country of Liberty for our children and the generations to come.


Gip, FL   November 20th, 2008 4:37 pm ET

Today here in FL, you want to buy a car, ou had better have a 650 score, thats for used ones too.

Glad to see the credit markets freeing up!!

Buy here pay here, going out of business too, they cant get the cash to buy the junk they sell to poor people and take advantage of them.

Im glad they are going out of business and, Rent to Own places I wish would all go away.

Liz   November 20th, 2008 5:55 pm ET

A couple years ago (2006) , when I could afford to buy my first car, I wanted to buy a used Honda/Toyota. However, my dad didn't want me buying a foreign car – he's a "Ford Man" and they are all my family has ever owned, so I ended buying an 8-year old Ford sedan. In the 21/2 years I have owned it, the brakes have had to be replaced a few times and the belts had to be replaced 5 times. Granted it was a used car and it is now 10 years old, but 5 TIMES! My cousin has a 16 year old Honda Civic 230,000+ miles, and until recently it has run great. No more Fords for me.

I think Ford, GM, etc prey too much on Americans patriotism, as in if you don't buy from them, you are a traitor. I am all about helping my fellow citizens, but at what cost? Throwing money down the drain for an American-made piece of junk? I know many young people who have negative views of Fords, Chevys, etc. and it is going to take years if not decades to reverse negative public opinion about these companies and their poor quality products. These companies need to wise up and dramatically change the way they do business- otherwise they will be back asking for more money in the years to come. No amount of bailout money is going to help these companies if they won't retool and start making vehicals Americans want to buy as opposed to hoping Americans will buy whatever they make. Until Ford and the rest of them can show that they are putting consumers preferences ahead of CEOs and big-oil interests, I am taking my business elsewhere.

al marenco   November 20th, 2008 5:56 pm ET

GM this is the same comoany that found the solution to fossil fuel with a very practical and succesful car and program and then SHREDDED IT! The Electrric carm now htey want trust their eyes nit what we see? Begging for money they admitted in the hearing not to need now but later in about a year while building a factory plant in Russia instead of USA, please spear me the REASONS.
B) 2nd : get togethre a;; CEOSm CFOs and Chairmans of succesful companies like PAYCHEX, CISCO, WEGMANS, BLAH
and ask them to help serch for the replaceement team

Help the tax payer   November 20th, 2008 6:07 pm ET

Congress, Larry King, Micheal Moore, Mitt Romney all get it, while auto execs just can't. Downsize, sell off jets, boats, 2nd and 3rd homes, RV's and learn to live in todays economy. I'm happy to see you guys read you blog before going on the air last night.

I had a foreclosure, I had a bankruptcy and the government stepping in to bail out this mismanaged auto industry is preventing me from having my time to gain wealth. This is the land of opportunity, if they go bankrupt others will step up and produce vehicles. The government stepping in to help bailout also unfairly deflates my credit score as it prevents others from dropping and mine from climbing. I made $0 in 06 as I put myself through college. I have 20K in college debt. I had to max credit cards to buy food, clothes and get cash advances for bills. I say government step aside. Let the poor now become the middle class.

Another note, in july of 08 we had 304 million people in the us. The auto industry wants 25 BILLION. If the gov gave us all 1 million they could save over $24.5 billion.

Avram   November 20th, 2008 6:42 pm ET

Has anyone heard of the electric car? Doesn't anybody but me realize that this the solution to the world economic and environmental problems? Tell the so called BIG 3 to get on board and build electric cars
or we will find someone that will. Start building the infrastructure for wind
power, wind turbines covering the wind corridor. Routing the power all over the USA, build charging stations and the turbines that will create enough jobs to fix the economy. Soon there could be cheap electric power for everyone in the USA and there would be cars running giving off no emissions. The electric car, it will save the world. WHY DOES NOBODY SEE THIS EXCEPT ME?

kenny   November 20th, 2008 6:58 pm ET

I’m a auto worker, why is it everyone wants to blame the uaw for the auto makers bad decisions, Everyone should watch the movie ” who killed the electric car” and see why Detroit’s in trouble. The Big Three along with some overseas auto makers sold out to Big Oil. That’s why Ford Motor Company still do not have a electric car program. Big Oil gave the Auto companies oil stock to destroy their electric cars, that’s why ford has bp stock and GM has exxon stock and so on, and it just blows me away no one wants to talk about this.

Ramon Blanch   November 20th, 2008 7:27 pm ET

The Big three, or GM in particular should turn to the oil companies for their bail out since they are producing cars to their benefit. After all, it was the oil companies that paid GM to shut down their electric car project.

sammy   November 20th, 2008 8:00 pm ET

give them the money sell the pvt jets sell all their hones except one..reduce their salaries to $1 a yr & CALL LEE IACOCCA in Los Angeles, CA..& warren Buffet ,,they will help Obama !..Iacocca & Buffet are very good them !..& where is Mario Cuomo..he grew up in the depression just like I did...

Sue Smith   November 20th, 2008 8:05 pm ET

A blogger last night mentioned a family member being a loyal GM customer and driving a Chevelle for many years. To respond, I agree there was a "glory days" of the American auto industry. My dad was a drag racer and his last race car was a 1965 Pontiac GTO. He remained a loyal GM man his entire life. He now is in the last stage of his life suffering from congestive heart failure and his last GMC pickup truck has sat parked for two years now.
But I believe something has happen in the last 20 years in the American auto industry and it isn't pretty.
My first car was a 1979 Pontiac Bonneville (given to me by my dad). I drove it about 5 years and then bought a 1987 Honda Accord. That car was awesome. Then I bought a 1995 Honda Accord that still runs today after 296,000 miles. But I bought a 2004 GMC Sierra pickup to pull a horse trailer. I just couldn't bring myself to purchase a foreign made truck. As I mentioned in the blog last night, my truck has been in the shop several times already and most recently for transmission rebuild. And I have NOT abused my truck.
I'm now 44 years old, and having driven both American and Hondas, I can speak from experience that the Hondas run longer and more efficiently. I'd love nothing more than for the facts to be different. But it's just not so.
I hope the American auto industry can come through this ordeal much improved and back on top of the industry.
No doubt, there are a lot of factors involved but certainly the leadership of GM and the UAW are going to have to make some drastic changes. Both have been operating greedily and without vision, in my opinion.

Ruby Coria, LA. CA.   November 20th, 2008 8:16 pm ET

Larry, Mike was right on last night,. A little over the top but good. American cars & people need to turn the page.. We need to say "NO on Oil., & No on pro.8* (had to say that) because we need to move on & not be stuck in the past..see u .

Lucy in Montana (not with diamonds)   November 20th, 2008 8:38 pm ET

I've spent the 6 hours reading blogs on the auto makers bailout and watching Larry King Live, Hard Ball, etc. last night. Wow–my eyes hurt after reading over 3,000 comments. The vast majority of bloggers seem to answer the question on bailing out the "Big 3" with a resounding "no." All blogs on Larry King Live (the easiest one to access for us technologically challenged people) were closed by the time I got done reading so I'm just holding this until today to send.
The CEOs who flew into DC with hats in hand really did not help their situation at all. What I thought about when I watched them being questioned was Marie Antionette and her "let them eat cake" comment about the peasants. Well, we the middle and lower classes (or "peasants" in this scenario) are ready to revolt. And, you know what happened to Marie Antionette! My only hope is that there are brighter people working in the Obama administration who can solve these problems without taking the whole economy down.
I hate to say it, but we, the people, are as much at fault as the government and the banks and Wall Street and auto makers. Our greatest fault is just plain greed. We take and take and take (some at a much higher level) and then wonder where it all went wrong. I’m talking credit card debt, overpriced homes, not being able to wait for anything but buying what we want when we want it. But I hope we have learned our lession and if/when we come out of this recession/depression, we will have learned that we have to work for what we want, can't spend what we don't have, and have to watch our pennies. AND WAIT FOR WHAT WE WANT UNTIL WE CAN AFFORD TO BUY IT!!!!!!!
And some other random thoughts on this bailout. Micheal Moore was calling for the making of electric cars or mass transit. I think the idea is great, but the reality is not so great. I live in a huge, sparsely populated state of less than a million people and getting to the nearest "city" means a one way trip of 150 miles–and we consider ourselves close to that city. You could use a hybrid, but not an electric car unless you were prepared to stop at a recharging station (kind of like the old stagecoach stations) for many hours on the way. This would take us back to pioneer days when a 300 mile round trip took many days. We could just as well go back to horses since we're living in cowboy country. And I think I could buy a horse a lot cheaper than a hybrid.
I have driven cars from Ford and GM for years–not because I have anything against Honda, Toyota, BMW cars, but again, I'd have to take that foreign car to the nearest "city," again a trip of 150 miles, for service as the only dealers out here are from the "Big 3." And I have to say, I've had no problems with these cars/trucks so don't know where people get the idea that they are inferior products. I drove a 97 Chevy Camaro Z28(bought used) and put over 100,000 miles on it over a period of about 8 years without anything except for normal oil changes, tires, etc. on it. I loved that car but a rear wheel drive "muscle" car is not the greatest thing to drive on ice and snow though I did it. And the highway mileage on that car was not bad–25-30 mpg. But I sold it and bought a 2001 Ford Explorer Sporttrack (again used) and have now put on over 100,000 miles on it with no problems. It's not as much fun, has lower mileage, and less power, but still a capable, comfortable (and as my husband calls it, a "wussy girl's truck") but it has 4WD and has served me well. (He drives a 2005 Chevy 3/4 T Duramax Diesel pickup–again having no major problems.)

I would love to see mass transit built all over this country. We used to have an Amtrak line through here, but lost that years ago because it was not cost effective in such a sparsely populated area. Our airline service is on-again, off-again and we have to fly to the nearest city on a puddle jumper when there's an airline who will fly into our town, then take a larger plane to wherever we're going. Or drive there and pay parking fees for the whole time you are gone. The Amtrak service wasn't much (if any) cheaper but we actually got to our destination quicker. We've even lost our Greyhound bus connections because it wasn't cost effective. We now have a local line that connects a few Greyhound routes, but again, it's cheaper and quicker to drive ourselves wherever we need to go. So, to make a long story short, mass transit is not cost effective out here. The only mass transit system that works is the Interstate Highway system and our own cars/trucks. We are not the only part of the country in this fix. What is the solution for us? Our wages are low, we can't afford big, expensive vehicles (much less our own private jets) so how can we bail out the "Big 3" when we're struggling to survive ourselves?
We closing our small business the end of this year because our customers cannot get credit in this credit freeze. We want to get out while the getting is good. The bank bailout (if they actually got the money) doesn't seem to be loosening up the credit any time soon. Why do we want to throw good money after bad?
My vote to the bailout is "no." Maybe a loan with a lot of strings, but if the Big 3 go down, something else will rise to take their place eventually. Then maybe some of the new technologies will actually be developed and have a chance in our system (and in this area of the country).
I wish I were one of the chosen few (read "rich") and could afford the new cars/houses/stuff that these CEO's have (again my greed showing), but I'm not and I have to live with what I can afford. So should they.

Sandy   November 20th, 2008 8:59 pm ET

Great show with Micheal Moore. we should also ask CEO's to drive their gas guzzlers to Washington. Cost about the same as their big jets.

Bill   November 20th, 2008 9:13 pm ET


unfortunately, I feel like 2008-2009 will be known as the year the country as a whole lost its sense of personal responsiblity.

this applies to individuals whom took loans over their heads, financial institutions, auto industry execs and unions.......................


Lorraine   November 20th, 2008 9:14 pm ET

Why can't the cuts start at the top in the auto industry and get rid of the smug and out of touch ceos? between them gone and the selloff of the airplanes they should be able to stay in business and restructure themselves.

Brick, NJ

siegfried mohr   November 20th, 2008 9:29 pm ET

hello larry!
first of all,Happy birthday!
to michael,i think he nailed the topic 100%.why can,t we get rid of all the bosses and have a receivership put in who then can come up with a selution and put it to a vote to help.this way we would have control how the money is spend and i think it would put trust in the company,s and there car,s again and people would by them again.also the receivership people would get rid of all asset,s who are not nessessery to run the company's,IE. learjet,holydayhome's for the ceo's,company car's ect.that would most likly free a lot of money.

Carlos H. Lackey   November 20th, 2008 9:52 pm ET

When asked if they would sale their private planes, the response should had been: YES WE WILL, in addition, WE'LL TAKE A $1.00 per year as our salary.....WHERE IS LEE IOOCCCA????
Had the CEOs answered with a heart the outcome would have been: HOW MUCH MORE, DO YOU GUYS NEED ???????

Dr. Sachtler   November 20th, 2008 9:57 pm ET

8 years ago (2000) I was in Germany and rented a vehicle for travel. It was a Ford Mondeo XL, built in Belgium. It was the size of a Honda Accord, had excellent acceleration, was comfortable and appeared well built, and made 47 mpg, all while I drove it at 100 mph. I converted liters to gallons and kilometers to miles so I know I was accurate. It also was a turbodiesel that didn't smell, nor could you tell it by the sound.

If the "Big 3" didn't utilize the technology that they had and was so clearly available then, why on earth should we think that they need the money for our best interests now?

Jon Brogdon   November 20th, 2008 10:08 pm ET

The Hell With the Auto Indust.
GIVE THE MONEY TO US!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Suzanne   November 20th, 2008 10:16 pm ET

I believe that the Government and Oil companies should bail out the Big Three. But first they should fire all the CEO's without a severance so they can see what it feels like to lose their job and collect unemployment. The Oil Companies should be forced to help because they have made record profits in the last few years. 90 billion in one quarter! Surely they have 25 Billion handy. Then the government should restructure the companies to make better cars that last longer and are more fuel-efficient. OK, I know they now have autos that don't need a tune up for 100k mile but the cars are not built to last and they fall apart. The Government should demand that the big 3 only manufacture cars in the USA and only use USA materials. They should also demand that they spend a certain amount of money on clean energy solutions and all manufacturing plants, showrooms, corporate offices are operated using solar energy. The only reason I even would make such a suggestion is because there will be a domino effect if we don't bail them out. I have friends that own car dealerships. I have friends that work for car dealers. They are good people. They will suffer, not the top executives. As a Nation we will all suffer if we do not bail them out. The government must hold the American Automotive and Oil Companies accountable and force them to restructure.

Duane   November 20th, 2008 10:20 pm ET

In order to protect the workers who in many cases have dedicated their entire working lives to the auto industry, fair or not fair, we need to bail the big 3 out to maintain the finacial well being of these working people and retiree's as well as what's left of our economy. No question about it. I am totally against giving these companies a free ride again and again. We need to hold their feet to the fire and let the fire burn them when they need to be burned. These executives claim to be "company men" but are they really? I think the only truely deep down dedication they have is to themselves. They need to be held criminally liable to the stock holders and the workers for possible extortion. They have no shame at all.

James C   November 20th, 2008 10:22 pm ET

Michael Moore views this crisis as a failure of capitalism . I view it as a success because failure is a part of capitalism. Think about it. If the government ran the car companies and if they were failing, all they would do is throw more money at the problem. When companies produce cars, if they don't produce the right cars they fail. If the government produces the wrong cars, they spend more to fix the problem. They would have to tax more or print more money to create better cars. Socialists would not let the market decide but would let bureaucrats decide what is to be produced. How is that more moral? I think the overall aim of Michael Moore's dream is to create a government run state where economic calculation is impossible and the people are told how much they are worth and goods and services are arbitrarily priced. How there can be a rational world on the macroeconomic scale I do not know. Certainly there would be a thriving black market as there is in any centrally planned economy. I wish someone would call Michael Moore out and ask him for his moral justification of socialism.

Sharon   November 20th, 2008 11:07 pm ET

I am really tired to hearing everyone trash the auto workers. There is so much misinformation about them. My husband worked 30 years for Chrysler. Before he retired he made $26.58 an hour ($30 with benefits). The most he ever grossed in a year was $54,000 and that was with a substantial amount of overtime. It was a good wage but certainly not excessive. I never knew anyone who came close to making the $76 an hour they keep talking about. Oh, and by the way, my husband died 1-1/2 years after he retired, a statistic that is not uncommon in the auto industry.

carrie in atlanta   November 20th, 2008 11:08 pm ET

Michael Moore is absolutely right. He demonstrates a greater understanding of the problems with the auto industry than the execs of the Big 3. Michael's passion and concern for the autoworkers is apparent and admirable. I agree that if money is given to the Big 3, it should come with a great deal of concessions and accountability for the execs.

Teddy Dawg   November 20th, 2008 11:23 pm ET

I was somewhat disturbed by Moore's comments near the end of his interview with Larry King where he stated that he hopes this is the end of Capitalism. Really Michael? Well let me say that in my travels and studies on earth one thing I have discovered is that no matter what type of political or belief system that any nation or people have instituted in human history one thing rings true all the time every time. That there will always be human greed which will lead to corruption and a segment that will always be wealthy and will want to control others. It is human nature in an as yet primitive civilization. For left wing pundits to now blame Capitalism as the evil doer in the global economic collapse is completely absurd. Capitalism built the U.S. into the greatest nation on earth...a nation that throughout its history has defended freedom and democracy throughout the world and has provided every American the chance to succeed in what ever they wished so long they had the desire to do so. For myself I would not want to live under any other system. I Father immigrated to NA from Eastern Europe after WWII. He had first hand knowledge of what un-Capitalistic systems under Hitler and Stalin did to human life. Believe me it was not very pretty Michael Moore. So before you go spouting off with your extreme left-wing may want to think about what the other options are.

William   November 20th, 2008 11:52 pm ET

Moore is on the money!

Paul Kerivan   November 21st, 2008 12:00 am ET

Hi Larry,
Michael Moore had some good points last night. Specifically that this is an oppurtune time for the US goverment to help the Auto companies, the economy and have the makings of a coherent national energy policy. By investing in the companies and new alternative powertrain technologies. This would generate new jobs in the industry and might spark a new industrial revolution while getting our nation off its dependence on oil.

There were a few misconceptions from Mr. Moore though he continues with a perpetuation of old perceptions (not factual) in regards to Detroits automakers not having equal quality or better than the many transplants that now have been assembling cars here in America.

People have a very short memory relative to why things are bad in the Auto industry. The foreign transplants started assembling vehicles here in the states initially because of political concerns and the perception that they were foreign and un-american. That is what the initial motivation was in setting up operations here. They still are foreign manufacturers its just that Americans now accept them as there own because they have assembly operations here. There is a lot more value added work/jobs than just assembly in the auto industry and in Detroit.

There are many reasons why our domestic auto industry should be supported. National Interest, Economy, perpetuation of jobs. If all the autoworkers are out of work guess who is going to pick up there unemployment? Not foreign car makers the US taxpayer will. In addition all the decisions by the Detroit big three managment are not bad. Market conditions changed for both working capital (The financial crisis and bailout) and a chang in consumers taste for product due to the gas price increases recently. Oil/Gas will continue to be volitile for years to come. History repeats itself again!

Detroit automaker company managment are not clueless although they did not collectivly represent themselves very well the other day. They should of presented a plan, and had Bob Lutz present it. At least he is bright outspoken and charismatic.

Regarding building the wrong products in Detroit. When a product decision is made to develop a product/vehcile. The product decision is made three years in advance. It takes approximatley 3-4 years of development, design, engineering, testing, and validtion before the public can buy one off a show room floor. (This work is all done in Detroit, most foreign manufacturers perform this work/jobs in there home country.)

That means the product you see today was developed and invested in three years ago! Managment doesn't have a crystal ball. They build what the public wants and buys, now the publics tastes have changed quite quickly I might add.

No one company can react that quickly especially in a capital intensive business like the automobile industry, coupled with the financial crisis manufactured by our friends on Wallstreet.

Even the now vaunted Toyota laid an egg with their new Tundra Truck recently. Its a gas guzzler too! So is there Sequia SUV... I don't here much critiszim of these products/company.

By the way where are all the bankers and CEO's of the Insurance companies, they just get Carte Blanche from Congress. They all have private jets too! most of them personal private jets.....!

Granted the Big three have issues, but that shouldn't mean we turn our backs on them. They are all Americans, they build a great product and they need help, we should all support them, but they do need a plan.

In the long run by supporting US manufacturing we will be supporting our selves and our children by creating work and the value add provided by manufacturing here at home.

Mike   November 21st, 2008 12:26 am ET

I have two comments. The first is about the unions. Michael was supportive of the unions but I think that they have a role to play in the demise of these companies. I grew up in Pittsburgh. High school friends worked in the steel mills as common laborers. Their salary was very high and one friend was told by a gang of older workers that he worked too hard, was handed a paperback book and told to go sit under a stairwell for most of the day. I intend to research the UAW benefits and history because I am curious but I have already seen several articles indicating that one of the reasons for lack of change in the auto industry in North America is because of the demands of the unions.

I think that unions have their value but just like any form of power they can be abused and abuse has and is occurring. Its about the average person taking their share of responsibility for wanting more and more for less and less. THAT is the source of our problems.

Frankly, unions play a role in why our schools are performing poorly as well . As a former school teacher I watched mediocre teachers destroy the potential of schools because of union clout.

My other comment is a more general one. The pattern I see at all levels of our society is people wanting more and more for less and less. This crisis is about governments, banks, industries, and people all spending beyond their means.

I am not a Republican. I voted for Barack. I am a moderate. I see the point of sensible moderate Republicans as much as I see the need for innovation and change. We NEED to cross party ideologies to solve this problem. We need both feshness and innovation coupled with fiscal responsibility of all of us to solve this.

This will mean that we cannot buy what we cannot afford at any level.

Jake   November 21st, 2008 12:59 am ET

Big Oil needs to bail-out the Big Three, not tax payers! Their collusion to stifle alternatives such as the electric car is what got them here.

Comments have been closed for this article

Keep up to date with Larry

Follow him on Twitter

Become a fan on Facebook

Contact us
Go Behind The Scenes


LARRY KING LIVE'S Emmy-winning Senior Executive Producer Wendy Walker knows what it takes to make a great story.

With anecdotes, provocative emails, scandals, show transcripts and insights into Walker's long working relationship with Larry King, her new book PRODUCER issues readers an invitation to listen in on the most intriguing conversations on the planet.

Order from:
Barnes & Noble

King of Hearts

Larry King's King of Hearts

Saving a heart a day is the goal! Learn more about the Foundation and it's efforts to help the uninsured

Visit the Larry King Cardiac Foundation.

subscribe RSS Icon
Powered by VIP