Archives

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/2/AmericanFlag.jpg Before you know it, they will be dictating what kind of fuel injection GM may install and how many union members will be needed to install it. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/01/AR2009050103395.html?hpid=opinionsbox1)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/Pesident_Barrack_Obama.jpgEva Rodriguez - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com) - May 3, 2009

This is a dangerous path. :( --Ed.

"I don't want to run auto companies," President Obama said last week. "I'm not an auto engineer. I don't know how to create an affordable, well-designed plug-in hybrid." To those of us who still quaintly believe in the power of private enterprise and free markets, that was a reassuring answer from the leader of a country heading toward owning 8 percent of Chrysler and 50 percent of General Motors. It suggested the president understands that, even with their lousy track records, business professionals are better equipped than government bureaucrats to decide what cars to make, what prices to set and how many people to employ.

Seconds after that promising, if relatively vague, opening, though, Obama took much of it back. He couldn't help himself. "But I know that, if the Japanese can design an affordable, well-designed hybrid, then, doggone it, the American people should be able to do the same," he said. "So my job is to ask the auto industry: Why is it you guys can't do this?"
ad_icon

So much for hands-off. George W. Bush may have been this country's first MBA president, but Obama is on the brink of becoming its first CEO in chief -- and that would not bode well for Chrysler, GM or taxpayers.

There's nothing wrong with Chrysler and GM building fuel-efficient green cars -- if they can make money. I'd have no problem whatsoever if one of them manufactured a pink, snout-grilled mini-car that ran on manure -- as long as it proved profitable. (I wouldn't buy one, mind you, but... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/01/AR2009050103395.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Eh, it's an opinion column by a union-basher. I'm not so worried. She ends by singing the praises of bankruptcy, but doesn't allow herself to point out that the President could have stopped bankruptcy with more taxpayer dollars... but didn't. I guess I'm one of those who "quaintly believe in the power" of sound journalism, which this doesn't qualify as.

The question to pose to the reporter is the management of GM and Chrysler - why did they get themselves into this mess?

If I were in the Oval Office, I'm want a panel with the likes of Lee Iaoccoa and other business men I respect.

I will trust Pres Obama when he says the government wants to get GM and Chrysler back on their feet quickly and return them back to the free market....if this goes on, I might reevaluate.

I know I wouldn't lend someone money without some kind of guarantee that I'll get it back. The money that the banks got? Why aren't people worried about that? There are a few acknowledgements here and there but nothing special.

He could have just let GM and Chrysler file bankruptcy with all the money that GWB allotted them through March. I for one think this is really the safest way to do it. I don't believe he will keep stakes in the automotive industry further than necessary for the US as a country to be competitive in the auto industry. We cannot add another necessity to the import list.

A man is made by the path behind, not the journey ahead.

"...I wouldn't lend someone money without some kind of guarantee that I'll get it back..."

Perhaps you already have?

Chrysler won't repay bailout money. An administration official confirms that a $4 billion bridge loan and $3.2 billion in bankruptcy financing won't be paid back by Chrysler following bankruptcy. (headline from)

http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/05/news/companies/chrysler_loans/index.htm?cnn=yes

DAS