Let’s put this into some sort of perspective. Clearly, in their first attempt for government financial help, the executives of the “Big Three” automakers had lost all notion of perspective. Just ask any teenager how best to approach a parent to ask for money. Rule Number 1: You have to at least make the impression that you are in dire need of it. If I came to my father dressed in an Armani suit, flashy tie, gelled hair, and freshly shined shoes and asked for $100 for the prom, he’d deliver a stiff kick to the family jewels before he gave me a dime. But it’s been a great many years since the CEO’s of Ford, Chrysler, and GMC were teenagers, so we shouldn’t be surprised at how unprepared and lacking sincerity they seemed to be at the first bailout hearing, right? Well, someone a bit younger should have reiterated to those big shots Rule Number 1 which in their case means: don’t take private jets to ask dad for money to the prom.

But like a good father, there’s room for a second chance. The government wants to see some effort if they are to dish out some serious cash, and told the auto companies to submit specific plans as to how they would restructure to become viable. And it seemed that this type of demand from lawmakers was just what the Big Three needed to get their heads out of their asses and start facing their problems head on. So what was one of Ford’s first announcements? Are you ready? You’re not going to believe it! They’re going to sell all five of its corporate jets!!! Ahhhh, now we’re starting to get it!

Ok, next on the agenda, cutting in half, the ridiculous amounts of different types of car models. Bill Vlasic of the New York Times puts it into perspective, “Between them, General Motors, Ford Motor, and Chrysler sell 112 different car and truck models through 15 brands in the United States. By contrast, the top three Japanese automakers -Toyota, Honda, and Nissan – have roughly half as many choices with 58 models combined sold through seven brands.” Now, I can appreciate the U.S. automakers growing their businesses to take on 112 different car and truck models. After all, there’s something obnoxiously American about owning a lot of different cars and trucks.  But now that everyone’s hindsight is a crystal clear 20/20, it’s safe to compare their car brand empires to the real estate market in Southern California over the last 10 years: it very simply, just wasn’t sustainable.

G.M. has already announced its intentions to try and sell its Hummer brand and is looking into dropping Saab, Saturn, and Pontiac. But it’s a serious process to eliminate car brands. It took GM four years and over 1 billion dollars to get rid of their Oldsmobile brand, according to Rick Wagoner, GM’s chairman. So it’s safe to assume a large portion of the potential bailout funds will very likely be used to trim the number of car brands.

Ford is in the best shape of the three and is claiming they only need their cut of 9 billion dollars as a backstop in case the current recession “is longer and deeper than we now anticipate” or if one of the other two companies go under. And of the three, Ford has disclosed a bit more on what their new plan for congress entails: Accelerating plans for more hybrid and electric cars, canceling all management employees’ 2009 bonuses, and the steps it has taken to cut its labor costs with the United Auto Workers union.  And a sure sign that the seriousness of the situation is sinking in, Ford CEO Alan Mulally announced that if the company does have to use that $9 billion, he’ll reduce his own salary from $21 million a year, to $1 per year (when asked a month ago if they would be willing to eliminate their own pay, of the executives of the Big Three, Mulally had been the most resistant).

And now, for the grand finale of his “LOOK, I FINALLY GET IT!” Campaign, Alan Mulally will drive a Ford Escape hybrid sport-utility vehicle to Washington to testify a second time before Congress. Now, despite this being an overtly obvious, but very well-intentioned PR move, a road trip might be exactly what Mulally and the other Big Three execs need at this point. A road trip can be a great meditation of sorts, enabling one to appreciate more fully the world we live in and bring clarity to one’s head. I can picture it perfectly: Mulally, on cruise control, jamming to his slightly scratched Journey: Live From Houston album, stuffing his face with beef jerky and Cheetos, admiring the endless farms and forests and rivers, realizing that he and the other Big Three got greedy. They got too big. They could have avoided this problem with a more disciplined business model. We didn’t need 5 company jets, he’d think. And then a sudden calm comes over him. Ford’s going to be just fine. In the grand scheme of things, there are worse things that could happen. We’re getting a second chance and I’m going to do it right this time around.  And he’ll pull up to Capital Hill and get out of his car a changed man. He’ll dust the Cheeto crumbs off his shirt, and make his way inside to once again request that money. And perhaps the Senate Banking Committee will find his plans and efforts sincere and well thought-out and agree to give Ford their requested money. And then, Mulally, grateful and proud, gets back into his hybrid and drives back to Detroit. But don’t be surprised if that car stays in DC and Mulally takes the company jet back home. After all, they haven’t actually sold the jets yet and he just scored $9 billion. What’s one more plane ride?

Written by Team Aguilar member Andrew Brentan

It’s safe to say that there are only a handful of people in this country with the knowledge and experience to at least convince everyone that they know how to help save our economy. At least those people are indeed working on the problem, and whether they really have a clue or not, they are helping me get to sleep a little easier at night by their reassurances that something is in fact being done.

But right when I wake up in the morning, I’m back to square one, thinking that no one has a damn clue as to what the right approach is to mitigate these issues. We have to face the facts that we, as citizens with a less than impressive understanding of economics, are relying on extremely intelligent minds to use all of their knowledge and experience to, at best, fly by the seat of their pants.

When Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Jr. and President Bush and Co. came up with the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), their intention was to help homeowners avoid foreclosure or to stave off bankruptcy by Detroit’s big three automakers. “Our initial intent had been to strengthen the banking system by purchasing illiquid mortgages and mortgage-related securities.” Mr. Paulson told the House Financial Services committee last week. However, while the legislation was being passed, the market crisis worsened significantly and, Paulson continued, “…by this time, given the severity and magnitude of the situation, an asset purchase program would not be effective enough, quickly enough. Therefore we exercised the authority granted by Congress in this legislation to develop and quickly deploy a $250 billion capital injection program, fully anticipating we would follow that with a program for troubled asset purchases.” This seems like Exhibit A of flying by the seat of their pants. But who am I to say it was right or wrong to do that. Perhaps it was indeed, the right move.

On November 18^th, before lawmakers and members of the banking and insurance industries, Paulson and the other salesmen and architects of the financial bailout package testified about how they’ve been using their allotted $350 billion. And it was clear that the panel of questioners were as baffled as you and I about if what was being done is the right answer. Questions regarding every facet of the bailouts were addressed, and with little evidence to suggest the bailouts were the wrong decision, Paulson continued to iterate that the stabilization of the financial system was of the highest priority. Melvin Watt, a Democrat from North Carolina asked, “How does putting money in a bank that didn’t ask for it stabilize the financial system?” Paulson answered that banks are “not going to raise their hands” and announce that they need capital. What happens is that they claim they are not in need of help, and then hunker down and cease “dealing with other banks” and freeze lending. Treasury decided to go to “healthy banks before they became unhealthy” to make sure they would continue lending. Sounds good to me, I suppose.

Spencer Bachus, a Republican from Alabama and ranking member on the committee, asked simply, if we’re on the “right track” in restoring lending. Ahhh, a nice, simple question. Something I’d ask Paulson myself if he were dining at my home. But of course, the answer to that simple of a question is anything but simple. In essence, Paulson responded that actions taken “outside of TARP” with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac potentially achieved more than if the Treasury had used the entirety of the bailout funds to buy troubled assets. Ok great, so potentially, we’re on the right track?

 According to well known investor Jim Rogers, everything being done, in his opinion, is completely wrong and the United States won’t be coming out of this downturn for years, perhaps even decades. In an interview with Keith Fitz-Gerald of Money Morning, Rogers bluntly describes the United State’s ever growing-debt.  ”I would say that for the last 200 years, America’s elected politicians and scoundrels have built up $5 trillion in debt.  In the last few weekends, some un-elected officials added another $5 trillion to America’s national debt. Suddenly we’re on the hook for another $5 trillion. There have been attempts to explain this to the public, about what’s happening with the debt, and with the fact that America’s situation is deteriorating in the world.” Here’s another potential “expert” on the matter who’s coming out and saying everything the Treasury’s doing is wrong. He thinks interest rates should be hiked up immensely to offset the “mistakes” of Greenspan and Bernanke. And I’m left sitting at home ready to strangle Mr. Rogers for blatantly destroying my layman hopes that those in charge of this are going to get us out of this.

So who are we to listen to in this serious time? Who are we to believe? Of course, like everything in this world, it’s not that simple. Listen to what everyone says. Understand as best as you can what is going on in our economy and comprehend that our country has already changed and will continue to change. Our country could not possibly sustain what it was doing the past 10 years and this economic crisis, as brutal as it may be and will continue to be,  will eventually right the ship. No one knows how long it’s going to last, and at this point, no one really knows if what we’re doing to begin righting this ship is the correct move. In January, President Elect Obama will take office, and with him comes a crew of economic advisors that look like an Olympic-caliber team of mathletes. I am confident that whatever these people decide to do, I will surely get behind them. To do otherwise, would be to claim that I know what’s going to happen.

Andrew Brentan is a Team Aguilar real estate agent and blog contributor