The last year has definitely been a rocky one for the auto industry, with American icons General Motors (NYSE: GM) and Chrysler both receiving billions of dollars from Washington in hopes of avoiding bankruptcy. While a lot of the country feels as though it is important to try to save the auto companies, not everyone is so happy with the recent events, and have been taking out their frustrations at recent auto shows.

The first sign that things are not quite the same as before can be noticed on the auto show floors. Typically in the past, the major auto makers spared no expense at setting up elaborate displays to lure in people to check out their most recent designs. This is not the case anymore for some of the industry's major players.

General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM), Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F) and all the other foreign and domestic automakers witnessed a 37% drop in U.S. auto sales in March compared to the year-ago period. The good news: that was a better-than-expected decline. When a 37% decline is considered good, there's the sign of a deeply-troubled economy (as if we didn't all know that already).

So far the auto industry -- General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM) and Chrysler -- have received $17.4 billion in U.S. funds after much gnashing of congressional teeth. Meanwhile, American International Group (NYSE: AIG) snapped its fingers and over the weekend some Treasury officials gave it another $30 billion -- bringing its total to $180 billion. But thanks to the worst February in 27 years, the auto industry is going to catch up fast.

February's auto sales plunge is a result of the realization among Americans that they can keep their current cars running longer -- and even if their cars are broken, they can't get the financing to buy a new one and they certainly can't pay cash for a car -- too expensive. GM's sales fell 53%, Ford Motor Co.'s (NYSE: F) sales declined 43% and Chrysler suffered a 44% drop. Incentives are not working -- the average incentive per vehicle sold is up 8% to $2,914. Only Hyundai -- which lets buyers give back their car if they lose their jobs -- bucked the trend -- its sales fell only 2%.

Well, is there any stock working out there? Here's one that isn't doing too badly. In fact, it's closer to a 52-week high than a 52-week low (and that's saying something). I'm talking about AutoZone (NYSE: AZO). It's actually up at the time of this writing by almost 8% on second-quarter earnings.

Sales increased 8%, and the bottom line expanded over 20% to $2.03 per share. What was the call? According to this source, $1.84 per share was the expected number. Great job, AutoZone. Now, the thesis here isn't too difficult to divine. No one wants to buy a new car from General Motors (NYSE: GM) or Ford (NYSE: F). Not only is a recession happening, but some consumers are probably scared to make a major purchase from companies that are doing so poorly. Ergo, car maintenance is all the rage. AutoZone repurchased stock during the quarter and kept its gross margin relatively stable. Domestic comps revved higher by 6%. Those are positive points.

Bad news for General Motors (NYSE: GM) and Chrysler: If ordinary Americans had their way, both companies would be out of business.

A new USA Today/Gallup poll shows that just one-fourth of Americans believe that the government should continue lending money to Detroit automakers -- a huge drop from the 61% that supported government aid back in December. There were 1,013 Americans surveyed from Friday through Sunday, and 51% thought that Detroit's auto industry would survive. That's a drop from 57% in December.

President Obama has reportedly dropped the idea of appointing a car czar to oversee the restructuring of General Motors (NYSE: GM) and Chrysler, and will instead leave his senior economic advisers to oversee the task.

The Presidential Task Force on Autos will be charged with overseeing the turnaround, according to an administration official who spoke with the New York Times.

What impact will this have? It's hard to know: But restructuring the industry by committee could lead to the same bureaucracy and inability to make tough decisions quickly that got the auto industry into this mess in the first place. The lack of a figurehead overseeing the turnaround also lacks narrative appeal for those who were hoping to see someone like Lee Iacocca make a comeback and save the day.

The latest edition of Motor Trend magazine this month notes that Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F) decided not to take the governments money because the family would have had to forego much of its income under the terms of the plan until they can turn the company around and pay back the loans.

They do not want to do that, and although they lost almost $3 billion in the most recent quarter, they are going to try and tough it out. The mags monthly notes comment that Ford is in better shape than General Motors (NYSE: GM) or Chrysler which did take bail out money having about $19 billion of liquidity remaining.

I've been watching for months trying to find a dumber approach to a bailout than TARP and now I've found one: France.

The French government said yesterday that it will inject as much as €6 billion ($7.86 billion) into its ailing auto industry. But there's a catch. Prime Minister François Fillon says that (subscription required) "There is no question of the state helping a car manufacturer that decides purely and simply to close one or more production sites in France."

That's right. Any company that closes an unproductive plant won't get any of that government cheese. Any economics professor will tell you that's an incredibly stupid policy. The point of a bailout -- if there is one -- is to buy time for an industry to revitalize itself. Insisting that companies continue to build cars when there are no buyers for them is just bad policy. It's all in the name of preserving jobs but it would be better to free up people who are building stuff no one wants so they can devote their time to something productive. With fewer new cars being sold, demand for mechanics and automotive technicians seems likely to stay strong and possibly rise. Wouldn't it be better to let the factories close and let the market redeploy the workers there?

It's just bad economics, but it has a nice populist ring to it that makes it politically expedient.

The United States government is providing $1.5 billion in loans to the financing arm of Chrysler to help it make car loans.

What? I understand that the credit markets are tight and that's making it tough for people with marginal credit scores to get car loans but here's the reality: People with marginal credit scores shouldn't be able to get new car loans.

There are plenty of used cars out there, and it's not in the long-term best interests of consumers to allow them to have large monthly payments on new cars that they don't need.

Recently GMAC relaxed its lending standards with the help of Treasury Department funds but as I wrote at the time, the standards were really not that outrageously high before the government aid. Of course lower standards are great for the industry because they'll spur sales, but at what cost to the financial health of working Americans?

Every personal finance expert on the planet will tell you that car loans because you can't afford to pay cash are bad news, and it's disappointing that our elected officials are providing the dry powder to let consumers get themselves in over their heads.

Tom LaSorda, vice chairman and president of Chrysler has a message for reporters: "We're not selling any brands, like a Jeep stand alone. We're just not doing that."

What? Chrysler goes begging for taxpayer money from the government because it was on the brink of running out of cash to fund operations and then dismisses out of hand the idea of selling off brands to position itself to survive.

Mr. LaSorda's comments are indicative of the arrogance of the United States auto industry, and his lack of flexibility will probably be a major cog in the downfall of Chrysler. Why would he completely write off the idea of selling brands? Wouldn't it make more sense to evaluate every single option for saving the company?

Chrysler is in crisis mode, and Mr. LaSorda doesn't have the luxury of dismissing any ideas for shoring up the company's balance sheet.

He should be let go as a condition for the company receiving any more funding from the government.

Today we got another clear cut sign of just how tough things have gotten for the auto industry. Japanese automaker Toyota (NYSE: TM) stated it is going to shut down factories for 11 days in February and March.

The news comes on the heels of yesterday's announcement that the company had a dismal month of December, with sales dropping by 37% in America, worse than Ford (NYSE: F) and General Motors (NYSE: GM), which saw sales drop by 32%, and 31% respectively.

The lack of sales resulted in one big problem for the automaker -- excess inventories -- leaving the company with no choice but to shut down production to reduce output in the face of continued slowing auto sales. The shutdown is going to affect all 12 of its Japanese plants, and is in addition to an already announced three day shutdown in the same plants this month.

Americans seem to have a "two-week" memory. Now that gas prices have fallen sharply, there is a sharp drop in the sales of hybrid cars. U.S. hybrid petro-electric cars sales dropped 53% in November and 37% from a year earlier.

Some models, such as the Toyota Prius, saw sales down more than 50% and Camry sales were down 57%. Sales of Ford's Escape crossover were down 35%.

Hybrids normally cost $3,000 to $5,000 more than their gas equivalent models. Edmunds, a motor service company, estimates that it will take nearly eight years for a Prius owner to recoup the extra cost of the vehicle.

There was, however, an increase in the sales of small cars in November to 18.7% from 16.6% a year earlier.

This whole change of attitude has Detroit automakers confused and is creating uncertainty in the marketplace. It would seem that this would further add to the already existing dilemma that automakers are facing in their efforts to restructure their business models.

Would you buy a hybrid car?

Anyone who has ever had their lives frustrated by bureaucratic nonsense from the federal government --- and that probably includes everyone -- should get a kick out of this one: Chrysler's loan application is still being processed.

The Wall Street Journal reports (subscription required) that "Application requirements for Chrysler's $4 billion in low-cost loans may push the payment into January, according to a person familiar with the process. The person didn't know specifically what requirements were causing the slowdown."

Here's what's so great about this: Mismanagement and bureaucratic incompetence led the company into a position where it needs a $4 billion handout from the federal government. Now bureaucracy at the federal government is making it harder to get the money into the company's coffers on times.

Ah yes: Chrysler and Uncle Sam teaming up to save the auto industry. This should work splendidly.

The New York Times has reported: The last Chevrolet Tahoe rolled off the line here in Janesville shortly after 7 a.m. in the 90-year-old plant, which had built more than 3.7 million big S.U.V.'s since the early 1990s. While the overall new vehicle market has dropped 16 percent so far this year, sales of big S.U.V.'s have plummeted 40 percent. Their closings leave the Big Three with only one factory each still devoted to making traditional big S.U.V.'s - Ford Motor (NYSE: F) in Kentucky, General Motors (NYSE: GM) in Texas, and Chrysler in Detroit.

The car manufacturers have been hit hard by tight consumer credit, the high cost of fuel and an overall slowing of the economy. All three manufacturers have been pleading with Congress and the White House for financial support and with the UAW for contract concessions. After Two of the three (Congress and UAW) failed to act, President Bush stepped in to provide an aid package of $17 billion to get the auto companies through the first quarter of 2009.

Despite the rescue package finally coming through Wall Street has not been impressed. The stocks of GM (NYSE: GM) and Ford (NYSE: F) are down 35% since the announcement. Ford closed yesterday at $2.19, down -0.40, losing -15.44% in one day. GM closed at $3.00, down -0.52, losing -14.77%.

Can either of these companies avoid bankruptcy if they cannot stay off the pink sheets? Is bankruptcy inevitable? Are you buying these stocks with hopes of a recovery?

The Wall Street Journal reports (subscription required) that General Motors (NYSE: GM) and Chrysler have reopened merger talks after Cerberus Capital Management, the company in the unenviable position of owning Chrysler, announced its willingness to give up part of its stake to get a deal done.

It's a nice public relations move designed to make it look like the company is doing its part to get a bailout done, but that's about it. Daimler AG, which still owns just under 20% of Chrysler, has already said that the equity in the deal is now worth zero. So Chrysler is trying to toss in nothing and call it a concession. Cerberus has still not indicated a willingness to pump any more cash into Chrysler -- that's the taxpayer's job!

Meanwhile, Chrysler shut down its factories for a month to conserve cash. The company is also socking it to its dealers with tighter terms. Dealerships will be fined (subscription required) for any new cars that languish on their lots for more than 360 days and will have to pay off the balances on any used cars that remain unsold after six months.

Given the way the car industry is right now -- with many dealers losing huge sums of money as they struggle to stay in business -- this could put more than a few dealers out of business. But given the number of dealers that the domestic car companies have relative to their foreign counterparts, that's something that will have to happen eventually anyway.