Should we have let them fail? Or is this a good thing? I am still using my ‘96, 4 cylinder Caravan. Averages 25 to 26 highway. Wish I could get one of those Sto and Go with a 4 cylinder, but they only make it in 6, DARN!!!
The UAW was the reason GM and Chrysler were uncompetitive and yet the UAW, along with the Gov't, eneded up owning both companies.
So the short answer is HELL YES we should have let the fail.
More accurately, they should have gone thru bankruptcy like a normal company where their assets would have been sold off to new owners who wouldn’t have had to deal with all of the UAW anti-competitive insanity. Instead, the Gov’t strong-armed the various parties in bankruptcy purely so that the UAW couldn’t benefit at the expense of everyone else.
sorry - meant to say - purely so the UAW could benefit
>> Should we have let them fail?
They might not have failed. No doubt the cost structure would have been adjusted.
The bailout was a union payoff. Make no mistake about it. It had nothing to do with saving what was once a reputable company.
“Wish I could get one of those Sto and Go with a 4 cylinder, but they only make it in 6, DARN!!!”
Yeah! We’ve had 4-bangers with turbocharger (not Sto & Go) and that is SO IDEAL I don’t know why everyone doesn’t offer one. Economy until you need a boost! What a combo!
“Wish I could get one of those Sto and Go with a 4 cylinder, but they only make it in 6, DARN!!!”
Yeah! We’ve had 4-bangers with turbocharger (not Sto & Go) and that is SO IDEAL I don’t know why everyone doesn’t offer one. Economy until you need a boost! What a combo!
Should we have let them fail?
They did fail, don’t you remember billions of our tax dollars went to pay for the unions and the government stole billions more from bondholders to give to the unions? They are still failed...and will always be failed until the government and unions get out...does that answer your question?