Obama Now Owns GM? Not Quite—and Not Quite a Bad Thing

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Nice post, thanks for writing!

seolace of AL 9:46PM May 05, 2010

subprime cycle said chemistrya palm wise shifting hockly novartis esmaili chen

Buy Ambien of AL 7:51AM April 05, 2010

There are a couple problems with this. The first is the fact that if GM does go under I dont believe Obama will own up to it, I'm sure he will just pass the blame to one of his many hench men. Second and more important by GM would have fail anyway, true. However with the government taking control it will be sure to fail as well. The government has never produced a profit off of any business they tried to intereven with etc. postal, transportation by train, transportation by boat,... soon automotive.

Trevor Laky of AZ 2:29AM June 02, 2009

Well now wait a minute, Linda. Careful about knocking the good ol' South, especially since your state is a good textbook study of political corruption :P
GM as a textbook management failure - absolutely. But don't forget the other two-letter acronym, GE. Jeff Immelt is the poster boy of corporate mismangement and international law-breaking by selling high technology to terrorist countries. Both of these American icons deserve to fail, and we should let them. Others will take their place, and the leader will be an American company, because failure begets ingenuity; and that one resource we have in ample supply.

Bryan Burgess of TX 10:41PM April 02, 2009

Detroit should be very worried about bankruptcy. A new buyer probably Indian or Chinese could come calling and since they are countries which despise unionized labor, will relocate their dilapidated and outdated plants to Southern states. They can park their shiny new plants across the street from Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes and look their competition right in the eye. Southern states will give away the land for free and provide a 10 year exemption on business taxes following Alabama's example to increase their chance of landing good paying jobs. Think this won't happen? Don't kid yourself. Tata Motors of India has been on a buying spree the past few years - LandRover, Aston-Martin, Jaguar, etc. But GM deserves it - too many years of disastrous business decisions and mismanagement. I'm in my second year of MBA school and we are studying GM as a textbook example of failed management.

Linda of IL 12:59PM April 02, 2009

I am wondering how the current trend of American Car being so bad began. I come from another country and I think American cars are good, very good!!!. The propaganda has been so hard that everybody believes it. They are not probably better thanks to the costs of current labor contracts. How how can you keep your current standard of living when you compete with countries like communist/capitalist China where the "slavor" is so cheap. That is really bad.
I agree about the dependency in foreign goods which is being created by the same US due to its bad policies, in the believe that the world play under the same rules of the US.
I don't think it is a good idea to save a company under the risk of bankrupting the country. I think that is bad bussines and from what I have heard Obana has no idea of how to run it at least he has no experience at all.

Ed of TX 1:32PM April 01, 2009

And with that, who in their right mind would buy a GM product for years to come? Answer: Uncle Sam
Army, Navy, Marines, makes me wonder if or when the Obama team will start looking at Boeing for their aircraft.
Amazing, if you are retired or sick guy, say goodbye to your benes....

Tom in San Diego of CA 11:26AM March 31, 2009

I think Obama is being to hard on the car companies. Every other country that makes cars tends to subsidize the manufacturs. And why not, who after all makes their tanks. Do we really want to be dependant on Chinese and Japanesse made tanks? Do we really want a military dependant on foreign goods? It seems to be what we have now. Let's try to become independant again before someone shoves our face in the recolonization of the US.

Bill Couture of CA 3:35AM March 31, 2009

Schlesinger you dumb ass. Do you like socialism? GM should be allowed to fail. Bad companies do that. That is what make free enterprise work. I swear that if your IQ were one point lower you would be a rock. Bad companies and banks and anyone else you care to include in this rant deserve to fail and not be supported by my tax dollars. That is unconstitutional and deserves everyones scorn. Hell we kicked Britain off our shores for that move. By continuing to reward bad behavior we send mixed messages as to what is right for future generations. I just find it hard to believe that you are that stupid let alone comfortable in that stupidity. But hey, stupid is as stupid does.

Jeff of WI 1:53AM March 31, 2009

At first, I was against the auto bailout. But, after thinking about it, I started to sympathize with Detroit. First, what has the government done to provide competitive advantage for US cars over foreign ones? Nothing. Foreign automakers can compete in the US just as easily, while paying lower wages since they're not bound by UAW contracts. And let's talk about the UAW: is there any other company besides GM that offers that kind of retirement package to employees? That practice bespeaks of a bygone era where companies were loyal to employees and vice-versa. Obviously, it's not sound business these days, but the UAW would not renegotiate. How about wages? Also much higher than industry standards. And when demand was slowing, GM couldn't fire anyone--they had to keep paying wages whether production lines ran or not.
As for not diversifying its lineup, let's remember that GM is a public company. When SUVs and trucks were selling like hotcakes, Detroit kept building them to satisfy Wall Street. That was Detroit's competitive advantage. Why would they build small cars when people would go to foreign company's for small cars? The bottom line is, small cars are a stop-gap fix anyway. Americans want big cars. They want trucks. All this talk about small cars being more "practical" is straw-man fare. Small cars are not practical; they're fuel efficient. Bigger cars are more practical: they're roomier, can fit more people, fit more things, provide better road height and visibility, and can be safer (don't talk about airbags; it's f=ma).
But what concerns me is what the shutting down of Detroit means for American manufacturing. What will happen if two of the most iconic manufacturers left disappear? It's not like new car companies can just sprout up and compete. Look at Tesla: they're asking for $450m in government money to produce their all-electric sedan. So is this the end of "Made in America?"

Brad of FL 12:56AM March 31, 2009