Comments on: Why Its OK If GM Fails

By: Tom L.

Tom L. — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 00:35:18 +0000

Miss JB, It is of course never a good thing for someone to lose their jobs, and upper management is to blame, but the cold hard truth of the matter is that nothing in this world is permanent, especially not a company. GM made plenty of mistakes because they "knew" in the end they would not have to lose a thing because they can lobby washington into believing that GM going away is bad for our nation and bad for it's employees. While this is true to an extent, if we continue down this path there will be nothing left. Money has to come from somewhere, it cannot just simply be printed and given away to failing companies, banks, or institutions as the appearant need arises. After GM receives a bailout and becomes owned in part by society as a whole, then so too will other companies follow suite. Gone will be the last rotting and festering shrivel of honesty left in corporate America. Why do the right thing when you (as a corporation) can use the government's (i.e. the people's) money to bail yourself out? All you have to do is make the case that a lost job is hard on people and families. These things happen, which is why it is important for as many of us citizens to live debt free as possible, and to expect the same of our bosses and our government leaders. The more people who are living their lives free from the burden of debt, the smaller the government's influence on our lives. As the people of any nation get further and further into debt they tend to grant more powers to the government than the government is deserving of.

In the end, this will be one of the ways the lobbyists and the corrupt government officials will rob the people of this nation of their freedoms without firing a single shot. We must stop this insane notion that "the people who are "smarter" than us" will help us get out of this mess. That kind of thinking is fed to us by those who would have us lose our control of our own destinies, We can no longer afford to pass the buck to Washington, we must take up the burdon ourselves.

By: JB

JB — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:30:47 +0000

It’s fine and dandy for people to say let GM fail if it isn’t your toes that are being stepped on. My husband has been retired since 1974 and he did not make the big bucks you all are throwing around in your comments. If they go under then they take alot of people with them that lose their pensions plus health care. It’s always easy to blame the people working for them but that is not the reason GM is in financial straits. Look at the upper management and how they handled things. Especially the ceo

By: JB

JB — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:28:45 +0000

By: Josh S

Josh S — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 18:36:11 +0000

GM has more potential than the current downturn in the truck market may suggest, and they have enough cash on hand to last far longer than many give them credit for. Given the phenomenal success of their Tijuana plant (non-unionized, highest-quality output of any GM plant) and their increasing numbers of Mexican engineers in their employ (Aveo was designed by Mexicans), I woudln’t be surprised if they gradually move so much stuff south that we start thinking of them as a Mexican company. If the US government and unions don’t want them around, they’ve got the resources to go elsewhere.

By: Brandybuck

Brandybuck — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 17:56:39 +0000

Actually, I think “Snow Crash” has a more realistic view of the economic world than does the Harvard Business School.

By: Leonard Huff III

Leonard Huff III — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:12:51 +0000

Goverments, 500 Fortune companies, states, county goverments, cities, local school districts, and alot of individuals go bankrupt every day or are going bankrupt soon. Used to be, there was a thing called a DEBTOR PRISON!, were people were locked up for this when it happened to them and/or entities.

Maybe, just maybe "WE THE PEOPLE" need to bring this back and try it for a little bit! Maybe it would get people to THINK TWICE before they load up 12 or 20 VISA credit cards to the MAX. and buy a house that they cannot afford or buy two new $40,000 cars on credit when it easy to get. It would get my attention for sure.

I experienced BANKRUTCY (NOT INDIVIDUAL), but as a hired gun. Dad, Brother, Business(Farming) had to take CHAPTER 12 (Farmer Bankruptcy) back in March 2001. In Midland , Texas I was a hired gun for ex-mother in law for the same thing. In Midland durning 1986, the price of six brand new drilling rigs value at $20,000,000 in 1981, fell to a value of $500,000. Banks wanted the difference NOW! No government bailout then. $1,000,000 in legal fees later (lawyers always get paid FIRST!) (WONDER WHY? -THEY MAKE THE LAWS! NO TERM LIMITATIONS IN CONGRESS & SENATE!) and 13 yrs later, ex mother in law in Midlad cleared up mess. February 28, 2008 took last payment with Mom to last Bank involved in mess for $65,678.98 and went home and had a few beers that night. Next morning , felt like ? , don't ask. ( I think I watch the Sun come up. Mind was litter fuzzing then)

Simple Answer to Problem! Make (people, corporation, Governments, Countries, World, responsible for the mess that they create out of stupid actions! be responsible for their actions and quit crying like a baby to me about your DAM little problem that you created and BE responsible for it. Period! Move to AFRICA and start over! Better take lots of FOOD, GUNS, AMMUNO, ECT.............

Have a nice day!

Peace & Love!

ps: Telephone call. Got the first rig "TURNING TO RIGHT" sooner than I thought that they would today. Great Drilling Contractor. They Drill Worldwide. (NOT EVIL VICE-PRESIDENT CHEENY HALLIBURTON, BUT PARKER DRILLING COMPANY) I never, never, never, gave up on the EVIL OIL & GAS BUSINESS. I knew it WOULD come roaring back like a pack of lions! Go short on OIL because prices are going to come down. WHEN? If I knew, I would play the FUTURE MARKETS - PUT & CALLS. I don't like to gamble! Go Figure. I have never been in a Casino in my life! ODDS ARE TERRIBLE! GREAT FOR THE HOUSE!

By: Bruce Hall

Bruce Hall — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 16:33:23 +0000

I'm not a big fan of GM although I live near Detroit.

Nevertheless, GM and Chrysler and Ford have contributed far more to the U.S. economy than some high paying assembly line workers [whose quoted high pay is often the result of working a second overtime shift].

Historically, Toyota, Honda, and now the Korean car companies have enjoyed the security of protected home markets and significant government support in the form of low taxes, export incentives, and minimal regulation. This has enabled them to remain profitable while focusing on expansion. That expansion included illegal "dumping" of vehicles and parts into the U.S. That expansion included setting up U.S. sales subsidiaries that bought vehicles from the home markets at inflated prices and sold them in the U.S. at paper losses to avoid U.S. taxes.

In the U.S., there has been an historically antagonistic relationship between the government and domestic automobile manufacturers which I attribute more to politicians needing election issues than anything else. For example, if there is a real [not artificially created] domestic oil shortage and consumers want small cars, why is it necessary for certain politicians to condemn domestic manufacturers for supplying what the market wanted 4 years ago or 2 years ago and create ridiculous and expensive mandates? Didn't Toyota create the Tundra and Highlander in response to the marketplace. Isn't Ford revamping its offerings in response to the marketplace?

That is not to say that large U.S. corporations are correct or "nimble" in their decision process. But there is more to the story than commonly portrayed.

How would the recreation industry react to an "environmental" tax of, say, $500 per camper... payable as an annual license? Look what is happening in Europe when you try to buy a larger than shoebox vehicle... environmental taxes. Or how about a mandate for all private campgrounds to reduce by 75% CO2 emissions from heating and campfires? I seem to have read that somewhere in the NW campfires are being banned because of CO2 "pollution."

It's easy for the government to point a finger at corporations and forget how many fingers are pointing back to government.

By: Flash Gordon

Flash Gordon — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:34:25 +0000

AT&T had been deregulated for 10 years when it acquired the cable giant TCI. The merger proved to be a disaster. The "phone people" at AT&T still had a regulated monopoly mentality trying to run a company that was built by entrepreneurial cable jockeys and depended upon that culture for its success. The cable people who were held over in the new company quickly became disoriented in the phone culture and either left or became malcontents. The only good to come out of the merger was the opportunity it created for Comcast to acquire some pretty good assets at a fire sale price.

I don't know if the AT&T now providing the cell connection for the iPhone is the same or a different company. I hope it's a different company because the phone people at the old AT&T are suitable only for government jobs. If it's a different company I wonder why they would even use the name given its negative connotation.

By: Highway

Highway — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:12:18 +0000

linearthinker: Daimler has already dumped Chrysler like the albatross they are, although they can be partially blamed for the current status. Chrysler LLC is now a subsidiary of Cerberus, a chinese corporation (privately held). And it basically has no future. They don’t even have a good prospect for a bailout.

Hopefully they’ll die, with their horrible product as well.

http://www.ericpetersautos.com/home/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=556&Itemid=10894

By: bbartlog

bbartlog — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 14:53:14 +0000

GM's debt and obligations are too enormous for it to recover without something like bankruptcy (that would let it discharge some of its debt). I think they have on the order of $250 billion in debt, and it's not cheap debt either.
A well-managed bankruptcy would probably allow the company to survive, but it's not clear how that would happen. One of the interesting aspects of the GM situation is that the bondholders have both a bigger vested interest and possibly more power than the actual shareholders of the company. In a normal situation, this hardly matters since both parties just want the company to do as well as possible. Here, though, the future earnings of the company even under optimistic assumptions are not enough to make both bondholders and shareholders whole (let alone UAW retirees). So you basically have three or more factions fighting over the last piece of pie, and any one of them also has the power to destroy what remains if they're not happy with the proposed result.
At any rate, while I think GM should be allowed to fail I expect some sort of bailout will actually happen. The company is far more iconic than Chrysler ever was, and the bondholders surely have enough connections in government to get themselves paid off by txpayers under the guise of saving an American industry.