Does Losing GM Matter? - William Holstein
Top Comments
All Comments (47)
-
@EverettsVLOG - He is not an idiot. He is simply taking a stance on the actual cause-effect relationship of companies failing vs making a normative-based claim regarding 'decisions' that you mistakenly think are solely GM's. The near melting of our credit markets made loans harder to get which hurt all auto makers and pushed otherwise solvent companies like GM over the brink. By the way, at this point GM is posting near-record profits and is poised to regain position as the #1 automaker.
-
@fenderstratguy - Not true. In an economy down in lack of aggregate demand companies to tend to hoard cash reserves instead of putting the money back into the economy. GM would have been broken up into little pieces and companies would purchase bits where they can maybe replace their own aging infrastructure. But those jobs would have been lost along with the suppliers would depend on GM for business.
-
The UAW + carmaker business model is broken, and the GM bankruptcy has not fixed it. GM needs to move all operations to a Right to Work state and teach Michigan and the UAW a lesson about biting the hand that feeds you.
-
The fundamental fallacy here is that if GM were not there, no one else would hire those people or make those cars -- a completely bogus premise. If the govt had kept its nose out of this, it would have saved taxpayers $52B in taxpayer dollars. Other US companies such as Fisker, Tesla, Phoenix, Aptera, and others would have instantly boosted capacity and fought to take over the best of GM's facilities. They'd leave the others closed. Instead, we all now own a giant cripple, on life support.
-
Chevy Tracker
-
Many Americans would be happier if GM was not getting government support. But that does not change the fact that most other international companies are the children of their respective governments.
-
Well, for one GM is the second biggest car maker in the world and what happens to them affects it's subsidiaries around the globe. Like Saab for instance. GM screwed it up and expected the Swedish government to bail that company out, and when they didn't they dropped it like a stone.
It doesn't matter though - those pesky "socialist" Italians at Fiat have come to the rescue and this will all be forgotten when you're driving around in cars the size of a shoe-box.
-
So your not even American? Why do you even care?
-
Which goes back to my original point.
Either stick by your 18th century frontier, no tax, gun-toting, every man for himself model or don't.
If GM goes under, that's how your market works. According to Friedman things will work themselves out.
Forget what the Europeans are doing. They pay higher taxes so their governments can look after them in times of need. You can't rail against big government, but go cap in hand when things go slightly wrong.
-
It doesn't, but worth noting what our industries are competing with.
No, GM does not matter. If there is a void in the market then a company who does not suck is welcome to fill it.
Atheistprimate 2 years ago 12
is this guy trying to a fuckin idiot? what does he have a lot of money invested in GM? since when is it anybody's 'decision' other than the success of the company to determine whether a company fails
EverettsVLOG 2 years ago 7