General Motors politics Trump

‘They Better Damn Well Open A New Plant’: General Motors As Public Enemy No. 1

"It’s not going to be closed for long, I hope, Mary, because if it is you have a problem."

"It’s not going to be closed for long, I hope, Mary, because if it is you have a problem."
This content has been archived. Log in or Subscribe for full access to thousands of archived articles.

5 comments on “‘They Better Damn Well Open A New Plant’: General Motors As Public Enemy No. 1

  1. Since when do supposedly free market Repubs try to run businesses and advise (threaten) them? No one likes people losing their jobs but companies have the right to make decisions in the best interest of stakeholders. Some do better than others and favor shareholders or mgmt over others. Repubs should create a level playing field and let the market allocate resources appropriately rather than take over mgmt or bully mgmt. Socialism and communism does not work T!!!!

    My hope is that these workers find better jobs at better companies. But we need to have smart people feel the freedom to invest and take risk to achieve reward.


  2. How much has the Trump Organization invested in Lordstown or anywhere else in Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin?

  3. Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs hastened this decision. GM was quick to take U.S. (and Canadian) government’s billions of dollars in the 2009 credit crunch to avoid bankruptcy (and the worker’s contributed, too). How soon GM forgets. It could be argued this is to avoid the next bankruptcy…but shipping the auto, SUV and light truck assembly jobs to Mexico doesn’t ‘pass the smell test.’

  4. When Government Motors, and so many other multi-national corporations have to woe overseas $$$ (USD dollars that have moved overseas due to the trade imbalance) in order to stay solvent, the United States has a trade problem that needs to be addressed. This blog would lead you to believe there is no problem at all, and the status quo is marvelous. This position is far from accurate or factually honest.

    The defense of free trade as an argument against what the Trump administration is trying to accomplish underlies all of the dribble on this blog. The issue is not free trade, but rather the one-sided trade model that commenced in 1994 when NAFTA first went into effect creating the Mexico trade imbalance and China devalued their currency by 30% and never revalued as the trade imbalanced ballooned (about 10 other foreign countries make up the majority of the trade imbalance). Wall Street loves the model because the massive dollar imbalance creates the opportunity for countless deals to be done with associated fees to reinvest the trade flow imbalances – can you say tech bubble, FAANG stocks, CTA, Bitcoin, etc.

    Once a dollar, always a dollar, and the perpetual trade imbalance that blossomed post 1994 that has been financed almost 1:1 by increasing levels of US National Debt has created very large pools of US dollars not controlled by entities or people within the boundaries of the United States. As a consequence, it means that increasingly the USD can be used in a ways that are not necessarily in the best interest of a majority of working Americans. In fact, the investment in China (electric cars) and Mexico (production) that GM is making is being done with American dollars, and therefore indirectly being underwritten by the American people. How do you suppose GM is going to recoup that investment, perpetually larger US National debt handed out to citizens to buy the vehicles??? That is the assumption that underlies the current “Wall Street free trade model”, one Henry Ford figured out long ago did not work unless there was a strong middle class to buy the vehicles being produced. Apple by moving all of its I-Phone production to China has already made this classic short-sighted mistake, as have many other multinational businesses over the past 25 years. There is little economic rational for the movement of high technology production for US consumption overseas other than the strict “non-free trade” rules in place which require companies to move their production in order to gain market access. These are hideous non-free trade barriers, which over the past 20 years have done substantial damage to the US economy and working class. But then again, what would an arm-chair market quarterback like the person that wrote this article actually know about such issues?

    If we lived in a free trade world, these trade imbalances would not remain structurally intact for very long, but they have and continue.

    The writer of this and other articles that involve US trade policy needs to drop the misguided political agenda posturing. You sound like a minion for Xi Jinping, President of the People’s Republic of China, who by the way is General Secretary of the Communist Party of China, the operative word being Communist where the definition of free trade is far different than the one used in capitalist economic textbooks.

    • It’s not the potus’s job to tell any company how to run its operations, let a loan a potus that has BK’d more than a handful of companies and sought and found financial salvation with foreign monies. The potus needs to stay in his own lane…..his job, at the very least, is to level the international playing field & keep it that way…..not run GM.

Speak On It

Skip to toolbar