General Motors Bankruptcy

General Motors Corp. filed for bankruptcy and became the second-largest bankruptcy in U.S. history. According to the Wall Street Journal:

President Obama defended his decision to take a majority stake in GM, saying it was unavoidable and temporary. “We are acting as reluctant shareholders,” he said in a televised address.1

2006 GM TEN Event - Stacy Keibler The story went on to state:

Some Republican lawmakers called the move another sign of the administration’s deepening incursion into the private sector. And the risk remains high that the administration or Congress could meddle in the company’s day-to-day affairs, an experience familiar to banks that took government bailout cash last fall.

Since it was reported that General Motors approached the government about a possible bailout2, this scenario reminded me of the following quote about how business leaders often seek government to intervene for the so-called “public good”:

Businessmen have done more than their full share to foster the active regulatory state from its very inception. Consider William Simon’s recent description of the relation of business and government as he witnessed it during his tenure as Secretary of the Treasury in the 1970’s:

“I watched with incredulity as businessmen ran to the government in every crisis, whining for handouts or protection from the very competition that has made this system so productive. I saw Texas ranchers, hit by drought, demanding government-guaranteed loans; giant milk cooperatives lobbying for higher price supports; major airlines fighting deregulation to preserve their monopoly status; giant companies like Lockheed seeking federal assistance to rescue them from sheer inefficiency; bankers, like David Rockefeller, demanding government bailouts to protect them from their ill-conceived investments; network executives, like William Paley of CBS, fighting to preserve regulatory restrictions and to block the emergence of competitive cable and pay TV. And always, such gentlemen proclaimed their devotion to free enterprise and their opposition to the arbitrary intervention into our economic life by the state. Except, of course, for their own case, which was always unique and which was justified by their immense concern for the public interest.”

One wonders whether anyone – with the possible exception of a few right-wing ideologues – any longer supports the free-market system as an inviolable desideratum; whether anyone is willing to bear its costs in order to preserve its benefits. Talk is cheap, and accordingly business people often talk as if they favor capitalism. But the blatant hypocrisy of their rhetoric suggest that it is either a political device, deliberately employed as part of a “public relations” strategy, or a mindless reflex inherited from the past and readily abandoned when it seems incompatible with short-run gain.3

What’s your view point?

Should the U.S. government continue to intervene in free-enterprise?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Sources:

  1. King, Neil, Jr. and Sharon Terlep. “GM Collapses Into Government’s Arms”. 2 June 2009. The Wall Street Journal 3 June 2009.
  2. Rasmussen, Scott. “Americans Have Voted ‘No’ on GM Bailout From Day One.” 1 June 2009. Rasmussen Reports. 3 June 2009.
  3. Higgs, Robert. Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987. 243.

Tags: Capitalism, Government Intervention, Robert Higgs

  1. Thanks for the insights.

    It is a mystery why, as a society, we are so concerned about saving failing companies with faulty business plans and corrupt executives, at the taxpayers’ expense no less. I see recessions as a time of healthy purging – getting rid of the weak and strengthening the healthy businesses. I guess you could call is capitalistic social darwinism.

    Government intervention is upsetting this healthy purging, and it will come back to hurt us, I predict.

  2. I watched a program tonight that revealed something to me. When Henry Ford finally got his assembly line automobile factory up and running and churning out hundreds of vehicles, there was a man that was in the buggy making business. He saw what Ford had done and saw the future was going towards the automobile. Did he wait for his buggy business to fold up and die and then ask to be bailed out? No. He adapted. He moved his business into the expanding market. Who was that man? William Durant, the founder of General Motors. Just a little piece of trivia and a look back in time to when the American way was not to get something for nothing and government wasn’t trying to control every aspect of our lives.

  3. Great observation Dave C. I think there is a great lesson there. Like you, I think these decisions will have many repercussions as well as intended – and unintended – consequences.

  4. What irony. I’ve mentioned this before RickM, but maybe it bears worth repeating. President J. Reuben Clark, Jr. said in 1945 that “History is repeating itself. Esau being hungry, sold his birthright to Jacob for a mess of pottage. We are a nation of Esaus. . . .” (Clark, J. Reuben Jr. in Newquist, Jerreld L., comp. Prophets, Principles and National Survival. Salt Lake City: Publishers Press, 1964. 322.) Sixty years later, that statement still holds true.

  5. Rick, I was totally going to comment on the Durant story. Did you go see Glenn Beck and hear that story from him? I saw him live on Friday night in Houston and was amazed at that story.

    Another story will have to do, then. Back in the 70′s we balied out Amtrak and were told by Nixon that this would only be for a few years until profibtability resurfaced. Well, to this day we still pump billions into that worthless business each year and have yet to see a return on our investment.

    The same thing is going to happen with GM/Chrysler. Do you really think if GM ever becomes profitable again that the government will just roll over and give it back to the private sector? No way! And if it fails, the only way they will sell it off is to pay for other more pressing issues, like social security or medicaid.

    The government has no business in the private sector. There is only one thing that the government does well, and that is running the military. Everything else is run with either a political agenda or for personal gain.

  6. Jeremy,

    I saw the show via simulcast but my father was the first to tell me about Durant. He grew up in that era and also worked for the Ford plant in Long Beach so I’m a familiar with a little of the history there. Glenn Beck filled in a few details and they happen to be true. Good homework on Beck’s part.

    Government has tried to do as good as the private sector but always falls short due to incentive.

    I’m reminded of that line in the movie “Armageddon”…

    “… you know we’re sitting on four million pounds of fuel, one nuclear weapon, an a thing that has two hundred and seventy thousand moving parts, built by the lowest bidder?”

    That’s just it. Quality is not the government’s priority.