The investment that’s Left

Last week the president took time off from golf and fundraising to brag about what a great thing he did in bailing out the UAW General Motors:

“Now, I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs, not just in the auto industry, but in every industry.”
Barack Obama, Pueblo, Colorado – Thursday Aug 9

“I want to say what we did with the auto industry, we can do it in manufacturing across America.”
Barack Obama, Colorado Springs, Colorado – Thursday Aug 9

That’s what we’re all afraid of.

The president should have waited to comment on the wonderfulness of Government Motors, as these stories from Forbes and Investors Business Daily show:

General Motors Is Headed For Bankruptcy — Again
Obama’s $25 Billion Government Motors Lemon

Any competent CEO/CFO would insist on knowing these facts, certainly he would do so before wishing GM’s fate on every other US manufacturer. I’m sure Mr. Obama did know these things. Think about it. Unlike every other CEO/CFO, he has the CIA, the NSA, the CBO, the GAO, the FBI, Tim Geithner, Harry Reid and John Corzine to help him out with industrial intelligence.

The president failed to mention his accomplishment in trashing the contracts for GM bondholders. Nor did he speak of raping Delphi salaried pensioners. Recognizing those acts as counter to the rule of law would involve ideas, not intentions.

At the moment, the GM bailout is just barely a better investment than A123 and Solyndra, two “green” initiatives the president has funded. He is at least consistent. The president dumped $500 million into A123 for batteries, and $500 million into Solyndra for solar electricity to charge the batteries.

What’s the return on investment from that? A bunch of temporary jobs in China, a taxpayer funded bankruptcy and the Chevy Volt.

Competitors be warned

Government Motors has powerful allies: The White House, FBI, FCC, NLRB, EPA, IRS, etc., etc.

Ford pulls its ad on bailouts

This is what happens when government seizes corporations. If it will decide to give money to a corporation going bankrupt, to negate legal contracts… to suspend the rule of law, then government owns the result. In the case of GM, literally and morally.

Criticism of such a deal is automatically politicized, and while political speech may be protected under the First Amendment; what is that to the Corporatist Axis? The Axis will suppress free speech in order to protect its political agenda reciprocal “investment.”

Ford should keep on, I’ll even buy one I don’t yet need just to get in Corporatism’s face.

Turning America into Detroit

The congresscritters in Atlas Shrugged said things similar in meaning, but not one of them was so dumb as Maxine “Moral Hazard” Waters.

If they [banks] don’t come up with loan modifications and keep people in their homes that they’ve worked so hard for, we’re going to tax them out of business

The ways in which this is stupid are beyond counting, but one has to wonder what is Ms Waters plan if she destroys all the banks. Didn’t we just get done bailing them out?* Are they suddenly too resistant to making more stupid loans not to be forced to fail?

Ms Waters, of course, is the congresscritter who threatened to nationalize the oil companies, “[T]his liberal will be all about socialize [sic]…er, ah … basically, … about the government taking over and running your companies!” One can presume she means the same thing when threatening to tax banks into extinction. The “government taking over your banks and giving them to Fannie Mae.” We know how that’s worked so far.

Even aside from its lack of conciseness, “the government taking over and running your companies,” is not a good euphemism for “socialize.” It is far too straightforward. But Maxine Waters apparently didn’t even get the memo that the proper description of her statist policies is “progressive,” which at least has the virtue of moving the statists away from their appropriation of “liberal.” A word that doesn’t mean what they’ve turned it into.

*Including her husband’s to the tune of $12 million.

Gas prices are too low

General Motors CEO Dan Akerson thinks the federal government should raise gas taxes by as much as $1 per gallon. He thinks this would make customers more receptive to smaller more fuel-efficient vehicles.

According to the Detroit News:

A government-imposed tax hike, Akerson believes, will prompt more people to buy small cars and do more good for the environment than forcing automakers to comply with higher gas-mileage standards.

Translation: “If we’re going to be forced to build cars we can’t sell. Consumers should be forced to buy them.”

GE already accomplished this with CFLs, so why not give it a try?

Anybody else see a problem with Government Motors petitioning the government for a tax hike?