Michael Moore's Letter: Tell Us What You Think

The anti-MM commentators need get over their biases toward Moore and look objectively at his arguments. There are are many examples in US history in which government-funded infrastructure development partnered with, encouraged, or created market-driven forces within the capitalist model. Railroad expansion of the 1800s, Eisenhower\’s highway construction of the 1950s, and the space program of the 60s and 70s (no Tang cheap shots, please). If you\’re smart enough to get an engineering degree, you\’re smart enough to understand a basic econ text and comment on his base proposal without frothing at the mouth. Please do so. MM\’s base proposal has solid historic and economic underpinings.

MM is a fool that walks in where angels fear to tread. Too bad he is so big and loud. He needs a muffler, a diet, and ego suppressing pills.

People buy large SUV\’s because like fat, sugar and salt they get addicted to them. The car companies got them addicted to them.

I\’m surprised so many engineers think that we can go on dumping CO2 into the atmosphere and using up finite resources.

All SUV\’s did was make money for car companies. People do not need them. It\’s all about looks and superiority not transportation

I\’m surprised that this professional magazine would lower its standards by reprinting anything from Michael Moore. I\’ve got the design specs for a perpetual motion machine and am wondering if this magazine will print it as well. It seems that many \”standards\” have been lowered in recent months.

It\’s difficult to take seriously anything Michael Moore says. The comments about his being a blowhard, idiot, socialist, etc. are all spot-on in my opinion. He\’s wrong on so many points in his letter it\’s not even worth responding to (okay, a few things he stated are fine but most of it shows his complete ignorance regarding manufacturing, market forces, free enterprise, and the contributions to failure made by the labor unions). I wish he would just go away and disappear in his fantasy Hollywood world.

When one looks back in history to the early 20th century you will see that America depended on mass transit using railroads as the primary method of transportation along with what was then known as the trolley car. They say what goes around comes around and it may well be. MM is correct we are at war with our way of life at stake, we need someone to take the helm and steer a corrected course and that involves funding technology if need be. As it is now you cannot keep giving out cash to businesses that are failing it is the same as using your finger to plug a hole to stop a leak it does not fix or repair the problem.

Michael Moore made a statement that in the 1980\’s GM sent the work out of America along with the jobs and the money we continue to do the same today and at the same time the cost of education is heading in to outer space and we lack engnineers and lament that we cannot find qualified candidates for the new technologies, it is time for a chance not in the way we live but in the way we educate and the way we tax you cannot sit back and expect it all too be taken care of by someone else we have got to get people up and moving away from TV and the internet and back to books and thinking.

MM is an idiot. If you want my opinion, he is part of the problem, not the solution.

He thinks the government can do a better job?

Jack_ss!!!

MM is an idiot and I refuse to dignify him by commenting on anything he has to say.

I am antagonistic to M. Moore, but he has a point. The point is, it is time to rethink our transportation and energy sectors. Distributed solar wherever there is a rooftop and need for electricity; much more wind power with storage at the windmill sites; thermal solar in the desert; replacing a substantial part of long distance trucking with electrified rail; city planning that allows bicycle and pedestrian traffic wherever it is needed, rather than excluding such traffic from automobile roads; hybrid electric autos that can run on multiple fuel sources (gasoline, natural gas or diesel as well as electricity);and efficient local electric bus lines that can replace more of the auto traffic; personal rapid transit; There are lots of ways we can go that can create jobs, clean the environment, and avoid dependency on a wasting resource, oil, which is killing the environment whether there is or is not climate change. Capitalism is magnificent, but there needs to be an input of other values in addition to the desire to make money. We can do better, it is inertia, greed and short sighted corporate management that places value only on short term profit. GM ripped up all the streetcar lines in American cities. We would be better off if we still had them. There is no reason why we cannot have public transit and cars at the same time. We already know how to build environmentally friendly, durable, energy efficient cars that don\’t need petroleum. Just do it.

Lets do it but only if its economically and technologically feasible. In my city there\’s talk of a 9 mile extension to our light rail system all for only $650M. The whole city transit system is $50M in the hole. How will they ever recover the expense? Taxing gas, now there\’s a terrifically stupid idea. That will help the economy, not. What about Obama\’s promise not to raise taxes on anyone earning over $250K? Oh, he broke that one already with the tobacco tax. Might as well break it again, right after he lets congress tax our employer provided health care. These people don\’t have a technical or economic clue. There going to wake up in 2010 with no job.

MM has piled it deep…if his cars are what people want, why are SUV\’s and Pickups what sells… wind and solar power stations - notice nobody wants them in their neighborhood…. high speed rail - read story referenced in Phil\’s comment, $20-30 million/MILE for track alone… retool factories - the days of universal machines is long gone … pay for it- taxes, Taxes, TAXES …… end result - you can travel wherever the government allows you to go,at the times they so choose….thanks Mike, but do us all a favor and move to the Cuban workers paradise.

Really!? You are worried about the land that would be needed for rail lines? That is such a ridiculously small part of the problem.

If you look at countries with successful rail operations (Western Europe, Japan, India), they have much higher population concentrations than the US. However, I think that we do have an opportunity to take some famous american ingenuity and retool some factories, build others, and make the parts cheaper here while using renewable energy. We are still a world leader in access to new technology. Lets prove it.

How many cars and trucks does Moore (and family) have?

Why do we have to give up individualism and damage the natural human spirit that makes us happy and driven to be productive?

To paraphrase Michael Moore\’s parting thoughts: \”60% of GM belongs to the federal government. I think the federal government can do a better job.\”

Before I sign up to this, is there ANY objective proof (or evidence) supporting this conclusion? Hope is not a plan.

Mr. Moore\’s comments about \”planned obsolence\” are way off the mark. If it were really \”early breakdown\” then it would have never flown when competitor\’s cars had much longer useful lives. Instead, GM\’s innovation was the yearly model and associated body style change which induced many people to replace cars long before their useful life had ended. While it created a temporary surge in sales and eventually was copied by all the other major car companies, its arguable whether it really increased long-term average card sales. It certainly created the used car market for more practically minded people.

I don\’t really understand why Michael Moore is concerned about New York to LA travel. A vast majority of the energy consumption is in local travel. Forget the trains for now and concentrate low energy consumption for local commutes to work and shopping and school. Since it is unlikely to get people to arrange their lives around public transportation, create energy efficient personal transportation. I suggest building separate roadways for bicycles and small electric vehicles along side or above highways and major arteries in cities. It is obvious to me, as a cyclist and a motor vehical operator, that cars and small or slow vehicles cannot share the same road. Building pathways for alternative transportation is a good use of \”economic stimulus money\” and does not \”force\” anyone into a lifestyle change. Having lived in cities like Chicago and Miami, I know that given a choice to slow down will appeal to large enough percentage of the population to make a difference. Let the expected high energy costs drive others to that conclusion. No need to regulate or tax people to force them to conform to the idea. Big government only begets more problems.

I would like to add one point: Long-distance trucking is nuts. Whatever rail system is built needs to accommodate rapid loading and unloading of standard highway 18-wheel rigs - I mean five minutes on and five minutes off. We need to design a station for this purpose.

While we are at it, expand on the Auto-Train that has run from Visginia to Florida for decades, again with a fast load-unload capability.

We don\’t need to give up our trucks or cars but we do need to move them long distances much more efficiently.

Oh, and if they were all electric, they could be recharged during transport.

Moore is a socialist.

Let the American public buy what they want.

Car companies have offered electric cars and small cars with great fuel economy. Those consumers that wanted those cars, bought them.

Do not let the government be in charge of any business. That is Socialism.

Michael Moore is a blowhard. His \”impassioned plea\” schtick is getting old.

First off:

How much land will need to be seized by the government to put in all these high-speed rail lines? The current cargo routes are pretty much full — where are the bullet trains going to run? This is a decades-long project to build all the high-speed corridors. It\’s almost a non-starter.

Second: I would guess that most light-rail lines are also close to capacity. And Moore wants to increase the passengers by a couple of orders of magnitude? Right. How much more land do we need to seize to build these extra expensive lines?

And, how many bus drivers will it take to serve rural populations? Has Moore ever lived outside a city? There are a LOT of miles of roads, and a LOT of places that people want to go. Am I guaranteed a bus to take me from my workplace to my son\’s track meet? I don\’t think that investment will fly.

And what about the substantial cargo shipments we depend on being trucked by gasoline or diesel engines? Are we going to offload that onto our light rail system? There\’s more than commuters who use our roads every day.

I think people are finding out that hybrid/electric cars aren\’t much more energy efficient in the long run than gasoline engines. So, why switch?

And, if alternative means of energy were cost effective, people would be buying them already. Making a gazillion of them will only waste people\’s money. Right now, a solar panel installation costs about as much as the electricity it saves over its ten-year lifetime. It\’s not worth the trouble, even assuming you live somewhere with ample sunlight.

And lastly, trying to fund this pipe dream with a gasoline tax will just put more people out of work. Will we have a massive migration fund to move people from thier homes to these new job centers in Michigan that Mr Moore wants to create?

Moore\’s \”impassioned plea\” sounds good, but it doesn\’t hold any more than emotional value. Let\’s see something based on solid engineering and economics, not sentimentality.

Sure, lets follow these suggestions. Pour $100 billions more into making product that the American people don\’t want and are not willing to pay for.

Even today\’s \”junky\” GM cars will last 150k miles. We can hold off from buying the \”eco\” friendly, people unfriendly cars for longer than companies can afford to stay in business.

Some of that stuff isn\’t exactly fair to the companies that aren\’t owned by the government. What if ford can build a better/cheaper train? We still going to only buy from GM? Gov\’t should have limited say and should reduce its stake below 50% as fast as possible.

As an older engineer, who has spent many years in heavy industry and watched as corporate folly and short-sightedness have driven our industrial base to it\’s knees, I say, let\’s do it. If the money exists (which it may not) let\’s do it, or at least the essentials. If we have the gumption and intestinal fortitude, let\’s do it money or no. At least, having worked to establish a viable, long-sighted and sustainable technological and industrial base, we will have a worthwhile legacy.

Interesting read…I have a few comments.

I went to school in Michigan and knew a lot of people who worked for the Big 3. Part of the issue with the workforce is the UAW. I heard countless stories of \”no, I won\’t do that because it\’s not in my job description\” or people napping for hours after their job had been done. I agree, if GM is going to come out of this stronger, they should look at the successful foreign companies (who don\’t have unions!)

In terms of his assertation that they can quickly flip manufacturing to alternative vehicles; it\’s not the same as the war example he uses. First, there is much more automation now…this lends itself to very specific part creation/assembly. Secondly, the capital to switch lines to create very different vehicles will be tremendous. Besides capital, it takes time to 1) find new equipment, 2) spec out the equipment, 3) vendor to build new equipment, 4) test new equipment, etc. It\’s not a flip of the switch.

I would also like to point out…if alternate fuel vehicles are in such high demand from the public and so easy to make; why aren\’t the other more customer focused car companies making tons of them?

This is not to say there isn\’t room to improve technology…it\’s just not as cut and dry as Mr. Moore makes it seem.

I\’m going to put aside my opinion of the author and say let\’s do it. The technology is there, it\’s been investigated in California and Arizona (story from last week, www dot eastvalleytribune dot com /story/139843 - particularly notable because the solar power array running alongside the track will actually generate more than enough electricity for the train) and there\’s no reason not to think outside the box. We really are at a unique time in history where the momentum is behind this sort of ambitious project, and it won\’t get done any other time. And as a young engineer I see this technology as a preferable alternative to continuing current infrastructure development trends, for environmental, economic, and political reasons.