I dont know if any of this means anything, but the vision portrayed by Johns Revelation...the last book of the New Testament... somewhat tells the story.
What it tells me, just one small christian, is that mankind (those who would destroy the earth for the greed) would not co-operate with mankind (those who would save the earth)...and at the end God Got disgusted that He allowed the period christians call the Tribulation.

Between now and that day I dont expect governments to agree on global warming and to save the forests.

I expect big business and wayward, persecuting governments like China to go on manipulating for their own ends.

There was no reason, other than big business manipulating for money, that we couldnt have played our part and opted to let the "dinosaur" go and built small engines/ electric cars etc.

As for jobs lost...Hah!
Governments can always find work for the unemployed if they want too. The Great Divinding Range needs to be replanted.
A million k's of roads need to be repaired. Other industries could be founded.
Be good to see the churches take on the greed in prayer. Maybe they too cant agree?

I'm with Ludwig. Anyone thinking that 4 litre cars will sell in 2012 is gambling, but in 2015 is a fool. The recent price spike in petrol was caused by increasing demand hitting a flat supply. We simply can't produce any more oil. The current global recession took the heat out of demand, so petrol prices have dropped. Some time between now and 2012 we hit the wrong side of the "peak oil" curve and supply will start dropping. Nothing will stop a relentless rise from there on.

4 litre engines are dinosaurs. They will die, regardless of government assistance. To put the assistance into perspective, look at what has happened in the US. At the start of November GM has $16 billion in cash. They expect to run out of cash in January. Why? The bottom dropped out of SUV's, yet up until September GM was planning to produce even more SUV's to try and save themselves.

Anyway, to keep GM going so they can retool would require $8 billion per month. Not even the US government can afford that for the time it would take to do the job. If Ford in Australia plans to be building 4 litre 6's in 2015 they face the same fate. The only solution is to get out of big engine car's, and to do so as quickly as possible. Anything subsidy that does not positively encourage a move in that direction is a waste of taxpayers money. A subsidy that encourages building them for another 7 years is madness.

Unfortantly, we could pump money into the two big US auto makers in Oz, only to have the American holding companies collapse.

Chiefly didn't launch an Australian car in car in 1948, he launched an Australian financed car built by the Holden Body Building Company. Instead of repeating this mistake, maybe we need to produce our car like the Malaysians (Proton), with Government taking (temporarily) the same course as Airbus. Under the Us-Australia Free trade agreement we could aim for the US market. Alternatively, if their are too many manufacturers, out there, let the market take its course.

Please stop kidding yourselves folks. Ford europe has the Focus, & the Mondeo, going great guns, & it's not stemming the financial tide. Then there's Mazda, roaring along in light & small, but it's not enough.

With those cars on the books, why would they waste money designing anything like you want, just for Oz. They could not build any of these existing cars in Oz, profitably. The Falcon only worked, as with the Commodore, because we wanted a unique type of car.

Well that's all over, we are being forced to lower our sights, to the type of rubbish the rest of the world is getting.

Make no mistake about it, Ford doesn't have 6 or 700,000,000 to waste on an Oz car. Ford will go, when the current falcons are finished, unless, like GM, they develop an export market for this type of car.

The Holden Commodore is still doing OK, but only just. There is unlikely to be a loose Billion for another, after this one. There is no chance of an Oz small car with MG here, either. With Opel, Vazhaul, Daewoo, & Suzuki in house, What would be the point.

Once we had CKD, [completely knocked down] assembly of imported components, but now it's so cheep, with roll on, roll off shipping, for complete cars, that's no longer an option.

Much as I hate the idea, I believe in 10, or 15 years, we will have the same car industry as the UK. None.

What price tariff protection now?

Examinator, I agree that a major adaptation from 4 to l.5 litre engines and entirely new vehicles to go with them would not be quick or cheap. But my main point is that there just seems to be no intention of heading that sort of direction.

For everyone concerned to apparently be happy with 6 cylinder engines and to just tinker around the edges with efficiency is nowhere near good enough. In fact it is perilously close to just propping up business as usual.... until it collapses, or until it requires another huge injection of funds....and then collapses.

And besides, do you think vehicles with 4 litre engines are going to sell in a couple more years when the price of oil skyrockets again?

Examinator “Do you have any idea how much capital is needed in both Ford and their suppliers to change from big 6's to efficient 4's Retooling would be in the $100's of millions for Ford alone then comes non productive set up etc. there is usually about 5year lead time. That is assuming they have the money which Given Detroit's problems I doubt it.”

So what!

That is either no excuse or it is the sort of excuse which I would only expect from someone with a vested interest in dinosaurs.

It is the same sort of excuse which people use when they think that government can fix problems.

Every year, every car maker in USA and most elsewhere go through a strategic planning process.

In those cycles issues regarding product replacement, the direction of R&D, changes and influences on the business environment, investment plans, positioning in different markets and geographies etc. are reviewed, collated and “strategies” to benefit from or minimize the consequences of those influences developed. This process cover a period of at least 5 years, often longer. These companies employ high priced specialists to manage this process, because of its consequence on directing multi-billion dollar enterprises. Ford and GM should know exactly when they will replace different vehicle features and how that will influence their market position.

The issue of oil price and supply instability has been with us for 30 years.

Any Car maker who has ignored that business influence deserves to die.

If these dinosaurs cannot develop their way through the 21st century, whilst their Japanese competitors seem to be dealing decisively in the same environment, then they deserve extinction and unfortunately, them who have jobs with dinosaurs is no different to having hitched their buggies to dead horse.

In UK in 1970’s “Saving Jobs” regardless of the consequences brought the UK economy to its knees.. “Saving Jobs” is like building up the banks of the Yangtze.

Creating real jobs from real work in businesses dealing properly with the realities of their commercial environment is what is needed and is an entirely different process.