What’s Good for G.M. Is Good for the Army By WESLEY K. CLARK

[babsbunny]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/16/opinion/16clark.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

AMERICA’S automobile industry is in desperate trouble. Financial instability, the credit squeeze and closed capital markets are hurting domestic automakers, while decades of competition from foreign producers have eroded market share and consumer loyalty. Some economists question the wisdom of Washington’s intervening to help the Big Three, arguing that the automakers should pay the price for their own mistakes or that the market will correct itself. But we must act: aiding the American automobile industry is not only an economic imperative, but also a national security imperative.

[mdmc]

1. Hummers for all!

Bailout the Hummer -
just nationalize the big 3...

[MichiganVote]

2. Yes but....can we get something solid on paper this time?

[wtmusic]

3. "Fuel cells will undoubtedly have many critical military applications"

Wes is out to lunch.

The difference between the 1979 bailout of Chrysler and GM is that at the time Chrysler owned General Dynamics, the single largest defense contractor, and they asked for 1/20 the money that GM wants.

[mike_c]

4. if, by extension, what's bad for GM is bad for the Pentagon...

...or the MIC, then let me be the first in line to take a sledge hammer to GM.

I want to "bail out" the union workers and the pensioners from the auto industry-- and preserving the auto industry is only one way to accomplish that-- and maybe not the best way. I don't give a rat's buttocks about the MIC and it's avarice, on the other hand.