J
J&J
Guest
Won't the government just make it too difficult for private car companies to be competitive?
Now that the US Government owns a car company, how can privately held firms compete?
rabidkitty
New member
No.
How can you compete with a competitor that gives it's employees free medical care, requires them to bank with a specific (national bank) at a cut rate? And is above the law?
How can you compete with a competitor that gives it's employees free medical care, requires them to bank with a specific (national bank) at a cut rate? And is above the law?
seahawkone
New member
They can't Buy GMUS.
YES WE CAN!
New member
We'll have government issue cars rationed out to families on welfare 
Good old usa!
Good old usa!Heavy_Cavalry_Sgt
New member
The intention is that the government won't maintain control of any of the companies it took a controlling interest in, but sell the shares back once stock prices rise to recoup it's investment.
That was covered, but perhaps you missed it.
Secondly, I can't think of a major privately held car company - even Venture is publicly traded.
Finally, if there were any privately held car companies, they still have the same advantages they ever held over monolithic corporations - agility. They should, in theory, be better able to adapt to consumer desires than GM did, for example.
When consumers were looking for fuel efficient cars, GM brought back the Camaro (neat car don't get me wrong), and bragged about 20mpg! Little off the mark.
That was covered, but perhaps you missed it.
Secondly, I can't think of a major privately held car company - even Venture is publicly traded.
Finally, if there were any privately held car companies, they still have the same advantages they ever held over monolithic corporations - agility. They should, in theory, be better able to adapt to consumer desires than GM did, for example.
When consumers were looking for fuel efficient cars, GM brought back the Camaro (neat car don't get me wrong), and bragged about 20mpg! Little off the mark.
Are you suggesting that private companies are less effecient than the government?
Of course in the case of GM the point is moot, as the gov. merely took stock in return for a cash loan, as any bank would.
But the larger point is the same as the point the right has been making about health care. You all say the government is terrible and inefficient, and then you say private enterprise can't possibly compete with a government plan. Which one is it?
Of course in the case of GM the point is moot, as the gov. merely took stock in return for a cash loan, as any bank would.
But the larger point is the same as the point the right has been making about health care. You all say the government is terrible and inefficient, and then you say private enterprise can't possibly compete with a government plan. Which one is it?