- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
The subsidies that go to foreign automakers are not from the federal government but state governments trying to lure jobs to their states. It's not the big 3 are intrinsically ineligible for these subsidies, but rather because they can't because they already have factories in the north (and union contracts for that matter). Every industry is exposed to these type of competitive attacks, and I don't like any of them. They only serve to move jobs rather than create new ones. Everyone would be better off being a little less provincial (intra and extra US)
That said, the the problem of the big 3 is not a problem of subsidies. Their problem are far deeper, resulting from year of mismanagement. The other fact is that we may have to accept that it longer makes sense that the U.S. have three automakers given the global economy. Might two be enough? I imagine the surviving two might emerge stronger. There's clearly not enough demand for thee automakers, but two could fill that need profitably. Isn't that better than just spiraling down the drain?
