A lot has been written about what has lead to the apparently inevitable bailout of the Big 3 auto manufacturers. Bad contracts with the UAW, unreliable cars, failure to keep up with "foreign" competitors -- all of these clearly have played a role. But I blame one other factor -- Democrats. No, I don't mean Barney Frank, Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi, although I'm sure I could find a reason to blame them too. I mean the urban and suburban coastal Democrats who have abandoned American-made cars.
In my very blue neck of Northern Virginia, imports far outnumber cars from the the Big 3. I've tried repeatedly to find statistics on this, to no avail. My informal counts of non-commercial vehicles as I'm driving on the Dulles Toll Road during rush hour almost always find imports accounting for 7 or 8 out of every 10 vehicles. If you discounted SUVs, Chrysler minivans and obvious fleet vehicles, it would be around 9 out of 10. On our side of the street in North Arlington, you'd have to go several blocks before you'd find another American car, other than the two Fords in our driveway.
For the past two presidential election cycles, I've made it a point to note American cars with stickers promoting the Democratic presidential ticket (as well as the even more rare -- a car with a "support our troops" magnet along with an Obama or Kerry sticker). I recall having seen only two American-built cars -- a Ford F-150 and a Jeep Liberty (of all blessed things) with an Obama sticker. Of course, those Hope/Change stickers seemed to come as standard equipment on all manner of foreign vehicles -- from Mazda 3's to Honda Odysseys. I've been astounded at how often a McCain/Palin sticker was attached to the rare American car I see on the road.
Don't believe my anecdotal evidence? Here's some proof -- a study that shows 71% of Democrats drive an import and 57% percent of Republicans drive an import. In my area, I think it is even more pronounced. So, maybe rather than sending billions of dollars to the Big 3, we could just have the Obama campaign machine crank out some ads appealing for his supporters to buy American.
Showing posts with label Bailout. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bailout. Show all posts
Monday, November 17, 2008
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Bailing on the Bailouts
With calls for nationalization of credit card companies and auto manufacturers along with further nationalization of the insurance industry, I think it is time for Republicans to get out of the bailout business.
I had very mixed feelings about the initial $700 billion bailout package. As a small-government conservative, I hated the idea of committing taxpayers’ money to a bailout of private business. As someone whose livelihood depends on the identification and assessment of business risks, I think those who are overly aggressive about taking on risks should bear the consequences of those judgments. I try not to be thick-headed about my libertarianism, and it seemed that a lot of smart people who understood the situation felt that the bailout package was essential. I gave some credit to folks who put their political careers at risk to vote for it. In hindsight, though, I’m not so certain the bailout package was necessary. I thought the key element was to create a market for illiquid “toxic” assets, but Hank Paulson now says that Treasury would focus on “injecting” cash into the financial industry not on purchasing these assets.
So, we seeing considerable mission creep on the initial $700 billion and "special interests" are lining up with their hands out. It’s time for a principled stand. Although there are a few folks who have made money by investing in failing businesses, they’ve done so by ruthlessly cutting costs (i.e., laying people off) and restructuring. The federal government lacks the competence and guts to do that. I hope I’m wrong, but I will be shocked if these investments wind up being anything other than an enormous cluster-f. Mr. Hope/Change and his friends will soon control the federal government. Let them own the coming disaster.
I had very mixed feelings about the initial $700 billion bailout package. As a small-government conservative, I hated the idea of committing taxpayers’ money to a bailout of private business. As someone whose livelihood depends on the identification and assessment of business risks, I think those who are overly aggressive about taking on risks should bear the consequences of those judgments. I try not to be thick-headed about my libertarianism, and it seemed that a lot of smart people who understood the situation felt that the bailout package was essential. I gave some credit to folks who put their political careers at risk to vote for it. In hindsight, though, I’m not so certain the bailout package was necessary. I thought the key element was to create a market for illiquid “toxic” assets, but Hank Paulson now says that Treasury would focus on “injecting” cash into the financial industry not on purchasing these assets.
So, we seeing considerable mission creep on the initial $700 billion and "special interests" are lining up with their hands out. It’s time for a principled stand. Although there are a few folks who have made money by investing in failing businesses, they’ve done so by ruthlessly cutting costs (i.e., laying people off) and restructuring. The federal government lacks the competence and guts to do that. I hope I’m wrong, but I will be shocked if these investments wind up being anything other than an enormous cluster-f. Mr. Hope/Change and his friends will soon control the federal government. Let them own the coming disaster.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)