Thomas Friedman has won three Pulitzers and has a steady job writing columns for the New York Times. Clearly, he is no intellectual lightweight, but his columns don't always support that notion.
His most recent work
is typical in its praise of green energy and condemnation of GM. In Friedman's eyes, GM is a loser that doesn't deserve our tax dollars. Instead we should be handing that money to startups in the green energy space.
"I've been traveling all across the country on a book tour, and every evening I return to my hotel with my pockets full of business cards from inventors in clean energy. Our country is still bursting with innovators looking for capital. So, let's make sure all the losers clamoring for help don't drown out the potential winners who could lift us out of this," Friedman wrote.
Well, that may be true, but Mr. Friedman should not forget there are also hundreds of like-minded folks who work for GM and Chrysler and Ford. Leave those companies to die and we'll be stifling the very innovation that Friedman finds so invigorating.
Green energy is promising and all, but in the meantime we still need cars. And not $100,000 electric cars, real cars, that real people can afford and use everyday. You know, the kind the Big Three make.
Inside Line News: "We're Subsidizing the Losers in the Auto Bailout"
flicmod says:
09:47 AM, 02/23/09
Oh jeez. Is EVERYONE perpetrating some kind of partisanship here? This isn't the stereotypical green vs. car guy argument. Stop making it into that.
The fact is that every time the government intervenes into the economy, the prices sky-rocket. It doesn't matter whether it's invested in green technology, large automakers, or space shuttles. The prices will go up because the government created false demand. It's telling the businesses that their products are worth something (more than they really are worth) and so they'll raise prices because that's what demand tells them. We've been doing this for years, which is why housing, new cars, and education are so expensive.
The best thing to do is for the government to get its grubby paws out of the entire market and let the consumers decide the fates of companies.
jederino says:
10:33 AM, 02/23/09
I tend to agree with the philosophy of creative destruction. However, GM is not like British Leyland, and do note seem to be quite the losers. I believe GM's products to be very competitive with Toyota. The biggest problem is capital, and the Federal government and the financial sector created this toxic environment. Every automaker is a loser in this environment, despite good products. Automakers operate on thin margins and huge scales. They cannot respond to wild gyrations in the market.
GM is more competitive than our massive banks. I vote for breaking up the zombie banks, and selling of the pieces, while extending loans to the automakers. Do not reward bank executives and investors who ripped us off, while misplacing our anger on domestic automakers!
dougtheeng says:
10:51 AM, 02/23/09
"Thomas Friedman has won three Pulitzers and has a steady job writing columns for the New York Times."
This may be true, but he is quite often off his rocker. I don't like to take sides in a debate on this topic, but Friedman is ridiculous.
cwc1 says:
06:10 PM, 02/23/09
"The fact is that every time the government intervenes into the economy, the prices sky-rocket. It doesn't matter whether it's invested in green technology, large automakers, or space shuttles. The prices will go up because the government created false demand. It's telling the businesses that their products are worth something (more than they really are worth) and so they'll raise prices because that's what demand tells them. We've been doing this for years, which is why housing, new cars, and education are so expensive."
Absolutely positively. One would think that more of the Washingtonians who supposedly represent us would know this. And I think they do, but don't care. They'd rather have a political return for themselves from our capital than for the country to have an economic one.
msdaisy says:
12:37 AM, 02/24/09
"The best thing to do is for the government to get its grubby paws out of the entire market and let the consumers decide the fates of companies."
By your logic, the government shouldn't have intervened and bailed out GM and Chrysler. If it was a free market, those companies would have a failed already.
I'm not sure if that was the point you were trying to get across or not XD
msdaisy says:
12:38 AM, 02/24/09
"The best thing to do is for the government to get its grubby paws out of the entire market and let the consumers decide the fates of companies."
By your logic, the government shouldn't have intervened and bailed out GM and Chrysler. If it was a free market, those companies would have a failed already.
I'm not sure if that was the point you were trying to get across or not XD
flicmod says:
05:38 AM, 02/24/09
"I'm not sure if that was the point you were trying to get across or not"
That's exactly my point. Thank you for reiterating :-)