General Motors Bailout? Can We Afford Not To?
To be or not to be, that is the economic question facing legislators, the current and incoming presidents, labor leaders, suppliers and manufacturers, unions and individuals affiliated with the automotive giant General Motors. At its current rate of losses, General Motors looks to go into bankruptcy by early next year, according to the Washington Post. For some, the cold brutality of the marketplace should dictate what happens to General Motors - they should succeed or fail according to their balance sheet. For others, the effect of a collapsing or a collapsed General Motors is something that would be catastrophic not only to their stockholders and those directly employed by General Motors but also a myriad interconnected affiliated and subsidiary group of entities encompassing millions of people (2.9 million, according to CAR - Center for Automotive Research) as well as dollars.

In other words, General Motors is far too massive, far too interconnected, and far too important to the American -- and, by extension, the wold -- economy to let fail. The ripple effect would shut down small and giant companies alike, ultimately ending in the collapse of the other two American automotive giants, Ford and Chrysler.

And that is just in the United States.

So how to forestall such a collapse?

President-Elect Barack Obama favors a plan that would take some of the money from the discretionary fund known as the $700 billion Wall Street bailout and shore up the flagging automotive industry. However, Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson opposes that idea. Although he maintains that he is open to ideas that would aid the auto makers, Paulson does not want any of the money to come from the $700 billion, which was set up to be apportioned to lending and banking institutions. The Democrats, including President-Elect Obama, see that $700 billion bailout money as taxpayer money to be used to help whoever might need it, but Paulson holds the discretionary power to dole out the money to whom he sees fit - a power given him by Congress in the bailout legislation. Paulson suggests an emergency stimulus package or loan of $25 billion, such as the one presented the automakers in September.

President Bush is also opposed to lending money to automakers that was set aside for the financial industry. Tony Fratto, a White House spokesperson, said, "We do not welcome efforts to weaken the Treasury program. The Treasury program is working to deal with the financial crisis, and that is what it ought to continue doing."

All told, the automotive industry is asking for an additional $50 billion -- $25 billion for operations and $25 billion to cover union costs.

Time magazine reports that General Motors has seen a 47% decrease in overall sales last year. They automotive giant has seen a 43% decline already this year. And although they corporation has cash funds, the money is running low. Going into 2008, General Motors had a cash pile of $30 billion to draw upon. It now has only $16 billion. And the corporation is dropping new vehicle designs, cutting costs and closing plants, and trimming employee roles are not slowing the losses fast enough.

The downward spiraling national economy is making its presence felt in Detroit.

Unemployment in the United States is 6.5%, the highest it has been in 14 years. Rates are trending downward. If General Motors or all of the Big Three collapse, not only do the unemployment roles grow and become stressed, but so do the pension funds guaranteed by the federal government.

The question that must be asked is: Should Congress rethink the discretionary power given Treasury Secretary Paulson. Many think so. Then again, many thought giving Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke that much discretionary power of so much money was foolhardy to begin with.

Democrats are going ahead with a measure to pull money from the $700 billion bailout fund. Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) believes that many of the Republicans opposed to a Big 3 Bailout plan might be brought around to support it if confronted with a possible public backlash should one or all of the automakers fail. A majority vote from Congress would also force president Bush's hand in the matter.

Time magazine's Bill Saporito may have said it best in his article, "Is General Motors Worth Saving?": "But ultimately, whether GM is dead or alive, the taxpayers are on the hook for billions, for everything from lost tax revenues to higher unemployment costs to taking over GM's pension obligations. The decision that Washington has to make is whether we pay for GM's survival or for its funeral."

And if Washington ultimately decides to pay for the funeral, expect it to be the lead funeral in a massive cascade of successive funerals.

And no one will have to worry about whether or not to call the economic crisis the nation is in a recession anymore. Because it won't be.

It will have entered a full blown Depression.

******

Sources:

Time.com

WashingtonPost.com

 
Comments 1 - 10 of 24 >>
Comments
The big 3 would be making billions if not for the 'other guys' since all Detroit makes are disposable cars that need to be replaced every three years.

Posted on 12/30/2008 at 9:12:35 AM

They should have put up for sale sign on Detroit and sold it to the highest bidder. The unions, workers and retirees were quoted as saying" They would not make any sacrifice to save the company.", so why should the American people??

Posted on 12/30/2008 at 9:12:06 AM

As far as the bank bailout, the banks run Washington and all those Senators and Congressmen who work for them. The unaccountable Federal Reserve runs ths country, and actually simply voted for it's own sham bailout to gain further profits at the American public's expense by taking over now a global industry, AIG, and the entire mortgage market in this country without any oversight or accountability, again, to Congress - simply the Secretary of the Treasury who was is and was an ex bank employee. This is CYA, nothing more, on the part of Washington again to do it's jobs - and regulating commerce and these banking concerns is one of their primary duties. The auto industry in this country has been weakened due to the removal of import taxes on foreign cars, even if made in this country. If it is a business with headquarters outside the U.S., than those companies in order to protect competitive U.S. industries, should be taxed.

Posted on 12/20/2008 at 7:12:12 PM

They need a restructuring, not a bailout. Particularly over their executive pay scales without stockholder approvals for those salaries and benefits. I have consistently wondered why executive compensation is left to Boards of Directors, many of whom also may be both directors, officers or employees rather than as a entity that is publicly traded and for which it is receiving public sums in the form of stock ownership, why the stockholders are not the ones to determine just what those executives fringe benfits, severance packages, and annual compensations should be.....and their contracts also ratified by those paying their salaries, the shareholders and investors. Once a small business goes public, there hasn't been the degree of regulation over the business practices of these "public" corporations by the federal government, if they are national or global concerns, or the states if they are state and regional. Long time past due, in my opinion.

Posted on 12/20/2008 at 6:12:51 PM

So we can give out Hundreds of billions to the banks that got us in this mess to start with and not give the BIG THREE 25 billion that will save 2.9 MILLION jobs with GM ONLY, PLUS MILLIONS OF OTHER JOBS WITH FORD AND CHRYSLER It make me SICK!!!!!!

Posted on 12/04/2008 at 5:12:48 PM

Honda and Toyota have plants in Alabama, Tennessee, and Kentucky....and they employ thousands upon thousands of American workers. . Honda and Toyota have sales that are significantly down, too. Should we bail them out to save American jobs? I mean, let's all cheer for "competition"...until someone beats us at competition and then suddenly we need to sing the praises of the Auto Workers Collective People's Party Corporation. It's spreading like a plague. So far the bailout's not working. Eventually the economy will rebound anyway and then everyone will rationalize it and say the bailout "worked." The only problem is that the kiddies will be two trillion dollars more in debt and you'll need a whole boatload of them to buy your 30,000 dollar Prius or your 40,000 Chevy Volt. A better, streamlined, pared down U.S. car industry will emerge from a re-structuring unless government bureacrats get in the way. I wonder how mahy people here own a Big Three auto? Those who don't ma

Posted on 11/19/2008 at 1:11:31 PM

Just because Democrats need to pay back UAW support in the recent elections, we have to cough up another 25 billion? As an emergency measure, I'd say let them do with the already handed out $25 billion whatever they think will keep them afloat. Just because we bail them out doesn't mean they'll suddenly be cash positive. We have two Fords, a truck and a sedan, and we are very happy with them both, but every 2nd car on the road is a Toyota or a Honda or some other brand. (which are mostly good cars, too) The American auto industry needs a bailout on the consumer end; give each of us 30K to buy an American car and then GM, Ford and Chrysler will get the money and we'll all be happy with a bailout. Otherwise, we're mortgaging the future, and you know how that went. BTW, maybe you will be interested in another viewpoint: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1199168/will_barack_obama_make_his_first_big.html?cat=3

Posted on 11/19/2008 at 12:11:06 PM

"Short another billion shares of GM, Ford and all things German," said "The Penny King!"

Posted on 11/16/2008 at 12:11:27 AM

Interesting article.

Posted on 11/15/2008 at 11:11:30 PM

These companies, or rather the CEO's of these companies, could have made very different choices years back. Yet, they decided instead that SUV's and other gas guzzlers would continue to be what they pushed to consumers. In future, if they don't adapt to the changing environment and make cheaper more fuel efficient cars, no bailout by Congress, or rather tax payers, will do a bit of good.

Posted on 11/15/2008 at 10:11:48 PM

Comments 1 - 10 of 24 >>