Throwing Bad Money After Bad
The automakers are back -- already -- with their hands out. Surprised? Thomas L. Friedman offers the novel idea that we should fund innovation, not people who have spent years avoiding it:
Reading the news that General Motors and Chrysler are now lining up for another $20 billion or so in U.S. government aid - on top of the billions they've already received or requested - leaves me with the sick feeling that we are subsidizing the losers and for only one reason: because they claim that their funerals would cost more than keeping them on life support. Sorry, friends, but this is not the American way. Bailing out the losers is not how we got rich as a country, and it is not how we'll get out of this crisis.GM has become a giant wealth-destruction machine - possibly the biggest in history - and it is time that it and Chrysler were put into bankruptcy so they can truly start over under new management with new labor agreements and new visions. When it comes to helping companies, precious public money should focus on startups, not bailouts.
You want to spend $20 billion of taxpayer money creating jobs? Fine. Call up the top 20 venture capital firms in America, which are short of cash today because their partners - university endowments and pension funds - are tapped out, and make them this offer: The U.S. Treasury will give you each up to $1 billion to fund the best venture capital ideas that have come your way. If they go bust, we all lose.
If any of them turns out to be the next Microsoft or Intel, taxpayers will give you 20 percent of the investors' upside and keep 80 percent for themselves.
If we are going to be spending billions of taxpayer dollars, it can't only be on office-decorating bankers, over-leveraged home speculators and auto executives who year after year spent more energy resisting changes and lobbying Washington than leading change and beating Toyota.
Also, any business that gets taxpayer funds should be partially owned by the taxpayers. They could have the option of buying taxpayers' shares back -- after paying us back.
Oh, and don't miss the hilarious bit above -- the notion that the government has the capacity to decide what wise business ventures would be.







Should we bailout the automakers, I'd love to see the Feds open the doors for applications for cheap money from their competitors, including Tesla, Aptera, etc.
jerry at February 22, 2009 3:19 PM
I want off this merry go round!
momof3 at February 22, 2009 7:32 PM
The Detroit auto makers specialized in larger cars, cars that are profitable for them and in demand in the US. They make profit on those cars. They also make a profit overseas on small cars. They lose money on the small cars that they build under the CAFE laws that support the UAW union.
A Car Wreck Made in Washington
Andrew_M_Garland at February 22, 2009 8:06 PM
"I want off this merry go round!"
You're not the only one.
In December, GM got over $ 3 billion from Canadian taxpayers. Now, in February, they're asking for $ 7 billion more.
I'm too frightened to think how much they'll be asking for in April.
Martin at February 22, 2009 10:54 PM
The unions are being payed back for their political support. What you or I want, or believe is prudent, is irrelevant.
We gave GM some money, and they invested it in Brazil, because that is where they can make a profit. Now, for a few more billions, they promise to lay off more UAW workers. It would be cheaper to buy the companies than to give them the bailout. It would be cheaper still to let them go bankrupt. They cannot be profitable with the current labor contracts.
MarkD at February 23, 2009 10:30 AM
Leave a comment