Screw GM.
So GM is now no longer a viable going concern according to its' auditors; GM posted a $30.9bn loss for 2008. To put that into perspective, that equates to a loss of $352,739 an hour, or $97 a second.
Earlier this week, GM's top executive warned the European divisions of GM could collapse within weeks without European governments' help - costing up to 300,000 jobs. Chief operating officer Fritz Henderson said governments should step in immediately to ensure GM Europe did not run out of money by April or May.
I think that's called "throwing good money after bad" isn't it? The governments can't keep stepping in to help - GM have just proved that. They took a huge handout from the US government not once but twice, and are still on the brink of collapse. Let's just think about the impact of GM ceasing to exist for a moment - highly unlikely even if they declare bankruptcy. Hypothetically, GM would close its doors and all 266,000 US workers would be unemployed, never to find work again, or so GM would have the public believe. GM maintains that it is really in the best interest of the country and economy to continue to support their failing business model. In truth, it's because they want to keep paying out massive bonuses for abject failure but they claim that the basis of their claim is essentially that they are too big or too important to fail due to their massive labour force.
Hmm.
Well the following companies employ a larger number of workers than GM: Target, AT&T, GE, IBM, McDonalds, Citigroup, Kroger, Sears, Wal-Mart, Home Depot, United Technologies, and Verizon. And those are just American companies. Abercrombie & Fitch employ a full 7000 people more than GM. By comparison to other companies globally, GM is actually pretty small. If we bail them out for a third time, that suggests we should also bail out those other 14 companies too based on the "we're too big to fail" argument? That's clearly a bollocks argument. Lets face it - would the loss of hideously overpriced Abercrombie sweaters as modelled by impossibly beautiful models negatively impact the economy?
It's unethical to force taxpayers to pay billions of dollars in order to bail out a company with a failing business model. After all, they can't even claim (like the banks did) that it is an industry-wide problem. You don't see Toyota, Hyundai, Honda, Volkswagen or any of the other car makers going cap-in-hand to the Capitol do you? No - only the big three US ones and that's because they build products that are shit.
Well that shit has finally hit the fan. Let them fail, and when they do, jail all the execs and top brass who steered the company into oblivion. Chapter 11 will force them to restructure and force them to come up with a viable business plan. Chapter 11 is far better for GM and the economy as a whole than simply giving them more and more cash for no return.
And what of the 266,000 unemployed? Here's an idea - forcibly seize the payouts given to the top brass and distribute them amongst the workers to help them out whilst they're seeking new employment. Those workers are no "unemployable" as GM would have us all believe. Quite the contrary - in hard times, skilled manual labour is exactly what the country needs.
Earlier this week, GM's top executive warned the European divisions of GM could collapse within weeks without European governments' help - costing up to 300,000 jobs. Chief operating officer Fritz Henderson said governments should step in immediately to ensure GM Europe did not run out of money by April or May.
I think that's called "throwing good money after bad" isn't it? The governments can't keep stepping in to help - GM have just proved that. They took a huge handout from the US government not once but twice, and are still on the brink of collapse. Let's just think about the impact of GM ceasing to exist for a moment - highly unlikely even if they declare bankruptcy. Hypothetically, GM would close its doors and all 266,000 US workers would be unemployed, never to find work again, or so GM would have the public believe. GM maintains that it is really in the best interest of the country and economy to continue to support their failing business model. In truth, it's because they want to keep paying out massive bonuses for abject failure but they claim that the basis of their claim is essentially that they are too big or too important to fail due to their massive labour force.
Hmm.
Well the following companies employ a larger number of workers than GM: Target, AT&T, GE, IBM, McDonalds, Citigroup, Kroger, Sears, Wal-Mart, Home Depot, United Technologies, and Verizon. And those are just American companies. Abercrombie & Fitch employ a full 7000 people more than GM. By comparison to other companies globally, GM is actually pretty small. If we bail them out for a third time, that suggests we should also bail out those other 14 companies too based on the "we're too big to fail" argument? That's clearly a bollocks argument. Lets face it - would the loss of hideously overpriced Abercrombie sweaters as modelled by impossibly beautiful models negatively impact the economy?
It's unethical to force taxpayers to pay billions of dollars in order to bail out a company with a failing business model. After all, they can't even claim (like the banks did) that it is an industry-wide problem. You don't see Toyota, Hyundai, Honda, Volkswagen or any of the other car makers going cap-in-hand to the Capitol do you? No - only the big three US ones and that's because they build products that are shit.
Well that shit has finally hit the fan. Let them fail, and when they do, jail all the execs and top brass who steered the company into oblivion. Chapter 11 will force them to restructure and force them to come up with a viable business plan. Chapter 11 is far better for GM and the economy as a whole than simply giving them more and more cash for no return.
And what of the 266,000 unemployed? Here's an idea - forcibly seize the payouts given to the top brass and distribute them amongst the workers to help them out whilst they're seeking new employment. Those workers are no "unemployable" as GM would have us all believe. Quite the contrary - in hard times, skilled manual labour is exactly what the country needs.
Comments