Then the airlines will get in line for their annual multibillion dollar subsidy. Then steel and then the construction industry will get a bailout and mark my words, the oil services industry - drilling, oil platforms, refineries and support industries will even get theirs.

George Bush will go down in history as the first communist President who did more to nationalize the basic economy as anyone. And when that happens our debt holders will hold the levers of our fundamental wealth. Buh Bye America.

Why should we give them one dime when they produce monstrosities like the Hummer which can destroy the environment even faster.

Let's not do it at all. It's not as if they would disappear. Somebody would buy the profitable bits. They need to pay the price for their lack of vision and, besides, all those furriners who have been buying all that dollar debt that your government buddies have been pedaling need to spend it on something here.

I guess I assumed that the heads of the Bush administration and the "big three" automakers were the kinds of people who trumpeted the sanctity of the free market and the need to do away with government intervention.

Was I wrong?

Yet another nail in the coffin of the free market zealots -- not that they'll notice. Their stupidity and greed always manages to exact a high cost on the taxpayers, while they get to keep their mansions and corporate jets. Once again, Americans experience a redistribution of wealth -- upwards.

100 billion bailout for a mismanaged mortgage industry at taxpayer expense, and americans react like battered wives; go figure!...... Makes Enron look like someones stolen lunch money...

Why aren't heads rolling at Freddie and Fanny?

This deal is fait accompli! Chrysler received a government loan to stave off mass unemployment and to re-tool by developing those awful K- cars decades ago. The cause is the same today as it was then. High oil prices in the late 1970s caused American consumers to flock to Japanese made cars, which were smaller, more reliable and fuel-efficient. American carmakers lost market share, which led to higher factory overhead burden and resulted in diseconomies of scale. Oil prices came down in the 1980s we got Reagan and Bushism that led us to where we are today. With lower oil prices Republicans disdained fuel efficiency and conservation. They encouraged our profligate use of energy as cars got bigger and fuel efficiency standards stagnated. We are back to where we were thirty years ago. The Republican solution now is drill baby drill.

When we find new oil, we will do this again.

Why aren't heads rolling at Freddie and Fanny?

Surely you jest. In fact, exactly the opposite is happening. For example, Freddie Mac's CEO Richard Syron managed to get a $14.1 million golden parachute added to his employment package less than two months ago. This parting bonus would increase the total compensation he receives for his tenure at Freddie Mac by over 80%.

I can't figure out how Freddie's board justified this in terms of shareholder value. The handwriting has been on the wall for a while now: The government's recent takover has been pretty much expected for months. So what do the shareholders get in return for their generosity to Mr. Syron?

While I agree that it's disgusting that the Republicans' concept of personal responsibility doesn't extend to their buddies in the boardroom, I have to say that a little government incentive to retool autos more quickly may help us at the pump faster than drilling in ANWR, particularly if there were strings attached. If Detroit can be convinced to develop truly oil-independent automobiles, I'd say the money spent is worth it.

The subsidy's and bailouts are getting to epic levels here in the US. If I were Europe I would be pressing the WTO.

And the US car industry improving fuel standards with these loans.. that is rich. They will use the money to outsource more labor.

We are getting closer to fascism every day.

They will use the money to outsource more labor.

Yes indeed. Our tax dollars will be used to cover the restructuring costs, and the American people will end up footing the bill for sending their own jobs overseas.

McCain will say this is good for the country and insist that we do more of the same.

It's about that simple. Since the 1973 "gas crisis" (you think US support for Israel had anything to do w the "gas crisis"?) the writing was on the wall.

Why should US automakers get bailed out? So the US can seize their factories and make tanks in them if it needs to? An earlier letter writer had invoked the memory of the heinous "K" cars -- who would want to drive such a piece of shit?

Bloated, poorly-built tanks weak on fit and finish. I've purchased half a dozen new vehicles in my lifetime and I always look at US cars first and they ALWAYS SUCK OUT LOUD, pathetic, behind-the-times attempts which look like pale, sickly weeds compared to Japanese vehicles.

I've worked one-on-one with enough CEOs to realize where the problem is. And it's not on the assembly line.

$50 billion? Forget it. Die, already. You've earned it.

How in the world could these bailouts ever be handled fairly, and that implies one auto company will file suit against the government, alleging favorable treatment for the other.

All of which leads to a discussion of where these tax revenues are coming from? To say specifically that you expect the taxpayers to backstop these things implies just that, and does not allow that deficit spending be allowed.

There's a point to be made here that either side might take, simply that you must actually pay for these things with revenues.

... how about they start by agreeing to stop lobbying against reasonable CAFE standards?

And also agreeing that they will not revert to gas guzzlers in the event of a gas price dip?

And that they begin shaping public demand with advertising that extols economy rather than crotch level images of racecars zipping along imaginary, traffic-free roads?