Risky Business

Republicans Taking A Stand Against Detroit Bailout?

By Matthew Bandyk

Posted: November 13, 2008

So last week I wrote that the Detroit bailout is a perfect opportunity for the GOP to take a pro-entrepreneur, anti-special-interest stance. Today John Boehner made an announcement:

Why are Democratic leaders in Congress discussing an additional taxpayer-funded bailout on top of that $25 billion package instead of ensuring these loans are made available to the automakers as quickly as possible? Why have the Democratic leaders of Congress been willing to provide this money without insisting that the companies receiving these federal dollars demonstrate to Congress and to taxpayers that they have a credible plan to strengthen their financial health?

Certainly encouraging. The White House is also voicing opposition to this bailout--but not because of any principled stance against corporate welfare (no surprise there).  Bush just doesn't want it draining Treasury funds from his other bailout.

Ford buys shares in Mazda; Ford sells shares in Mazda.

BMW bought British automaker Rover; BMW sold British automaker Rover.

Daimler-Benz bought Chrysler; Daimler-Benz sold Chrysler.

Wake up, people. Hello! Hello! Do you see a pattern here?

WHY WOULD SUPPOSEDLY INTELLIGENT EXECUTIVES MAKE SUCH DUMB ACQUISITIONS ONLY TO SELL THEM A FEW YEARS LATER?

(Answer: Because they were just following orders)

Jeffrey W. Bowyer of NE @ Nov 18, 2008 08:46:55 AM

bailout

I say no to bailout and yes to restructure. The UAW has ruined the car industry. I have relatives and friends that make more money being laid off than I do working. They absolutely get 90% of their wages when they are laid off. If you get their wages in line with the rest of the American workforce and when you are laid off draw unemployment like the rest of the work.

The retired force is a joke.

If they could restructure the waste that the union people say they deserve maybe they wouldn't be in trouble

Linda In Indiana of IN @ Nov 16, 2008 06:53:55 AM

Continuous Bailouts

I think that all these bailouts are a joke. Why should we spend our money to bailout the companies that screwed us and will continue to do so?! The automotive industry does create millions of jobs for people, so I'm more in favor of that one than the lending institutions bailout. I personally think that is a joke.

These are people that lied, stole and cheated their way to get to position they're in now. They told people they could afford houses that were so far from their price-range and then stole their homes when they couldn't make the payments they knew they'd never be able to make in the first place.

We need to let some of these companies go under so that we can weed out the bad ones from the good ones.

If we're truely going to "change", then we need to begin by helping the people. If you dispursed the money that we're spending in this bailout to everyone over the age of 18yrs. and had guidelines, obviously giving families more than singles, everyone would be able to pay their bills and start spending again, thereby relieving everyone's economic crunch.

I definately think we need to dispurse some of this money into small businesses though.

Amanda of WI @ Nov 15, 2008 21:02:14 PM

Add Your Thoughts
About You

advertisement

Risky Business

Risky Business

Matt Bandyk, a reporter for U.S. News, explores capitalism from where it all begins, with the entrepreneur, whose risk taking and experimentation provide the roots from which the rest of the economy grows. As much courage as it takes to create one's own business, even the entrepreneur needs some help, and this blog will look at news, trends, and practical advice for starting and running a small business.

advertisement

advertisement

Subscribe

U.S. News Digital Weekly

A weekly insider's guide to politics and policy — in a multimedia, digital format. 52 issues for $19.95!

U.S. News & World Report

6 months of U.S. News & World Report's print edition for only $15. Save up to 67% off the cover price!