[MrIcky]

"1 Help as many otherwise screwed Americans as possible. By keeping GM afloat, millions of Americans keep their jobs."

OK, I'm with you here- but my philosophy is more along the teach a man to fish vs the fish for a day concept. Earmark the money to modernize into flex plants, coerce dropping non-productive plants. Defer new CAFE standards but tie the development to more future proof engines.

"2 Protect American businesses. The US needs that money to pay for government programs and policies, including the military and federal expenses."

Pelosi is exploring the idea of basically printing money to prop up GM as status quo. So you are then stating we need that to continue tax revenue. Well why not just give the Big 3 a 2 year tax deferment? By printing money we devalue the dollar decreasing your buying power (inflation?). At least in 79 they had a clear law. If they do this like TARP then there is minimal oversite and the plan can be changed on a whim. Honestly, if TARP doesn't prove to you why we need very clear legislation and restructuring with any aid to GM, then I'm at a loss.

"3 Be fair to the market as a whole. As someone who supports American hegemony in the international system, I believe that the US should protect some of its businesses before allowing companies that make less than genius market decisions to fail. In a purely capitalist system, GM should fail for not following the market and making too many SUVs, but that would terminate the employment of millions of Americans and kill enormous amounts of tax revenue. I care less about the world market than I care about American jobs (see 1) and American businesses (see 2). If I were Italian, I'd say that I want to protect Italian jobs and Italian businesses as a priority over the world. "

American Hegemony maintained through government protectionism and Fair to the market as a whole are mutually exclusive by definition.

That being said, I'm not against supporting Ford and GM. I want Ford and GM to have plans on how they will be competitive again in 2-5 years and I want any money to be tied to specific performance of plan items. I do not have faith that Wagoner will use the money wisely. Don't tell me he'll use it wisely, give me a plan that shows how.

I want to make one very big point, so forgive me for yelling: WE'VE SEEN THIS COMING SINCE THE EARLY 80s!!!!! But even seeing that this was coming, GM has been notoriously labeled as one of the most risk-adverse companies to ever exist. Saying that Wagoner et al. don't want to lose their job is not the same as saying they know how to keep it.