No one said you couldn't indulge in unsupported shit flingings. Indulging yourself in them doesn't make them something other than unsupported shit flingings though.
I think when the government bails out a failing company the size of GM or Chrysler, and then tries to impose a time table to get itself out of that position or to impose a budget on peripheral events like advertising (as if anything other than an announced give away of Chrysler or GM products at the moment would inspire anyone to buy one of their products) and put the focus on getting through bankruptcy's steps for reorganization, it is in the best interest of the taxpayers. If you think otherwise, how about explaining what you do think on this, and then justifying why it would be better? Right now you sound like one of those "Just Say NO" republicans being obstructionist obfuscation peddlers.
Excellent point. Forethought would/should have addressed the issue of how to restructure and emerge on the other side while still maintaining a reasonable level of sales.
Back in February, the Washington Post offered SOME insight to what GM and Chrysler were working on
(and already had been doing) to stay alive. It's not as if they were just sitting around playing Free Cell while Rome burned although that's how it came across.
Was it really not enough? If you read the Obama plan
, it is apparent that NOTHING short of bankruptcy would be good enough so both companies were wasting time trying to find a way through.
It is interesting to note that the Unions (to which I am not opposed and don't wholly blame) got knowledgeable representation to look out for their interests while the companies got Treasury Officials and some "industry experts" (who's calling the shots on THAT team?).
If you don't know where the finish line is other than, on a certain date, we'll tell you if you did enough, how much deeper do you slash what you've already been cutting away at?
I'm out of time...gotta get to work.