There isn't that much of a labor difference, overhead difference, etc. between building a $20,000 car and building a $40,000 car.

Add to that the reality that China is breathing down the necks, not just of American car companies, but of Japanese and Korean car companies as well. The Chinese are not investing in all that heavy industrial equipment to make apparel. They want to get into higher markup industries and automotive is one of them. The Chinese car models should be showing up within the next five to ten years and the idea that a U. S. company could compete at the low end with a Chinese car on price under current work rules is absurd.

It’s not at all inconceivable that Americans will no longer be in the car manufacturing business twenty years from now.

Also it is important to problematize what you mean by "American" manufacturers.

GM and Ford have farmed much of their production out to Mexico and Canada, while Honda and Toyota have expanded production in the US.
In fact, if you look at the raw stats, production of vehicles in the US has been stagnant for the past 20 years.

As the dollar gets weaker, it would probably not be unlikely that manufacturing in the auto sector could even grow. Companies like GM may be toast, but US production of Japanese brands will continue to expand.

I'm sure they do.

You claim in the post that Honda and Toyota DO NOT pay for retirement and health benefits:

"They’re in a global economy competing against robust companies like Honda and Toyota that can put out great products without the burden of paying retirement and, especially, health benefits."

Like GM, Toyota and Honda DO have the burden of paying retirement and health benefits. You are correct to suggest that Toyota and Honda's terms are better than GM, but they contribute to such benefits nonetheless.

I'm sure at least part of the blame will fall on US manufacturers' systemic inability to make a car that people actually want to buy, and that lasts more than 3 years, and whose sticker price & gas thirst can be afforded by anyone making less than $250k...

I dunno. You can certainly buy reliable, fuel efficient American cars for under $20,000. My Ford Contour was virtually problem free for six years before I traded it in.

I agree, though, that there are market niches not being well served. I traded the Contour (and some additional cash, naturally) for a Nissan 350Z. There really isn't a comparable American car these days in anything like that price range. The Mustang is aimed at kids and geriactrics, the Corvette has gone from a n affordable sports car to a near-exotic, and the Camaro is out of production.

Also GM and the other car companies are going to have those legacy costs no matter what, they decided that it was better to distribute that money to the shareholders when things were good and now they belly ache about not having enough money to fund legacy costs.

It’s not at all inconceivable that Americans will no longer be in the car manufacturing business twenty years from now. The UAW may well be hastening that product.

I'm sure at least part of the blame will fall on US manufacturers' systemic inability to make a car that people actually want to buy, and that lasts more than 3 years, and whose sticker price & gas thirst can be afforded by anyone making less than $250k...

I know for a fact that Toyota employees at plants in the US get retirement and health benefits.

I'm sure they do. But, since their manufacturing here is a relatively new thing, they presumably negotiated much better terms. More importantly, they don't have a decades-long backlog of retirees.

. They’re in a global economy competing against robust companies like Honda and Toyota that can put out great products without the burden of paying retirement and, especially, health benefits.

I know for a fact that Toyota employees at plants in the US get retirement and health benefits.