Automaker Execs think $1/year Salary Enough?
Big Three want more money in bailout
The price tag of a loan to the Detroit automakers could top $34B: GM is asking for up to $18B, Ford wants $9B and Chrysler, $7B.
"The plans included salary cuts for top executives, the sale of corporate jets by General Motors and Ford and the possible elimination of two GM brands - Pontiac and Saturn. But the Big Three are also now asking the government for as much as $34 billion instead of the $25 billion they originally wanted."
Ridiculous, these failures want us to give them even more money than they originally asked for an think offering to take a $1 a year salary and selling their corporate jets is enough to show good faith? Forget that.
And here's Pelosi:
"Bankruptcy is not an option. Everyone is disadvantaged by bankruptcy. It takes too long. What takes a year we can do in a few weeks. ... I don't think anyone wants to see bankruptcy,"
Economic idiot or blind idealogue?
While I don't *want* to see these companies go down to bankruptcy, I would have much preferred them to run themselves well enough to weather the storm of the economic downturn, I would prefer to see them go into bankruptcy and have to reorganize than to see them be bailed out by the government to reward their poor business practices. I'd rather see the entire domestic car manufacturing industry collapse than have the government prop them up. Bankruptcy is absolutely an option, and not only is it an option, it's the best option for these companies to go through.
Why? Because the frenetic race for profit and darwinian struggle for a companies survival is what gets us to the high quality of life we are able to enjoy. Companies must have to try and run themselves well without thinking they will get or getting government support if they screw up (assuming they are a business in the private sector - some things like National Defense obviously won't be able to be provided in the private sector) because it's that struggle to innovate and profit and survive that drives our capitalist economy forward. We've seen how much failure comes from a centrally planned and propped up and supported industry works in the total lack of progress communist countries have or had managed over the last century, and the absolutely awful state of quality of life their people suffered under such draconian measures. That is not a road we should be looking to tread down. The Free Market works, and sometimes that means letting companies, or whole industries go under when they fail to remain competitive.
But Chapter 11 Bankruptcy is the natural occurrence in business when a company is struggling to stay solvent. And if they can't, I don't care how big they are, or how many people might be negatively impacted, we shouldn't be propping up a failed business. Chapter 11 is a last chance, a lifeline thrown to a company going under to let them get their house in order to try and stay afloat. And it's far more lenient than even a lot of very left leaning European countries afford failing businesses. But it must remain up to that company to try and pull themselves out, get rid of the dead weight that's dragging them down, and ultimately survive.
We shouldn't be spending a single dime of bailout money on these inadequate, decaying, wrecks of botched business.
The price tag of a loan to the Detroit automakers could top $34B: GM is asking for up to $18B, Ford wants $9B and Chrysler, $7B.
"The plans included salary cuts for top executives, the sale of corporate jets by General Motors and Ford and the possible elimination of two GM brands - Pontiac and Saturn. But the Big Three are also now asking the government for as much as $34 billion instead of the $25 billion they originally wanted."
Ridiculous, these failures want us to give them even more money than they originally asked for an think offering to take a $1 a year salary and selling their corporate jets is enough to show good faith? Forget that.
And here's Pelosi:
"Bankruptcy is not an option. Everyone is disadvantaged by bankruptcy. It takes too long. What takes a year we can do in a few weeks. ... I don't think anyone wants to see bankruptcy,"
Economic idiot or blind idealogue?
While I don't *want* to see these companies go down to bankruptcy, I would have much preferred them to run themselves well enough to weather the storm of the economic downturn, I would prefer to see them go into bankruptcy and have to reorganize than to see them be bailed out by the government to reward their poor business practices. I'd rather see the entire domestic car manufacturing industry collapse than have the government prop them up. Bankruptcy is absolutely an option, and not only is it an option, it's the best option for these companies to go through.
Why? Because the frenetic race for profit and darwinian struggle for a companies survival is what gets us to the high quality of life we are able to enjoy. Companies must have to try and run themselves well without thinking they will get or getting government support if they screw up (assuming they are a business in the private sector - some things like National Defense obviously won't be able to be provided in the private sector) because it's that struggle to innovate and profit and survive that drives our capitalist economy forward. We've seen how much failure comes from a centrally planned and propped up and supported industry works in the total lack of progress communist countries have or had managed over the last century, and the absolutely awful state of quality of life their people suffered under such draconian measures. That is not a road we should be looking to tread down. The Free Market works, and sometimes that means letting companies, or whole industries go under when they fail to remain competitive.
But Chapter 11 Bankruptcy is the natural occurrence in business when a company is struggling to stay solvent. And if they can't, I don't care how big they are, or how many people might be negatively impacted, we shouldn't be propping up a failed business. Chapter 11 is a last chance, a lifeline thrown to a company going under to let them get their house in order to try and stay afloat. And it's far more lenient than even a lot of very left leaning European countries afford failing businesses. But it must remain up to that company to try and pull themselves out, get rid of the dead weight that's dragging them down, and ultimately survive.
We shouldn't be spending a single dime of bailout money on these inadequate, decaying, wrecks of botched business.
1 Comments:
My biggest problem with these bailouts is the seeming lack of oversight. There is not necessarily a reason why a bailout could force the re-structure that in the end could be profitable. However, with the way our government looks over things we all know that's not going to happen and we might as well throw this money right into the pockets of the heads of the companies while they all still go down the tubes. There needs to be strong metrics tied to this money if it is ever going to be successful. Pelosi is a fool if she thinks that simply tossing money into a situation will make it go away.
Post a Comment
<< Home