C-in-C or Micro-rmanager?Follow

Hmm. I know this will invoke the gbaji-esque hand-wringing of the Pubbies, but it seems Obama is skating on thin ice.

As a pinko-liberal, I'm not paranoid about 'Big Government'; indeed, the welfare state here in Britainland has provided education, social care and healthcare for me and mine. But when the PoTUS starts intervening directly in Management decisions, I do scratch me bonce and wonder what he's playing at.

I am, of course, talking about his personal removal of Rick Wagoner as Chairman and CEO of GM.

Now if Mr Wagoner is a inkompitunt ***** it's reasonable that US tax payers should question him running a corporation that has enjoyed bajillionms of their hard-earned dollars. But to do it as an executive decision sounds naive from a political perspective.

Why not establish a cross-party panel or task-force and mandate it to take such decisions. If Wagoner's unfit, a Dem/Pubby panel would find it out. Same end result. Less scope for the right to accuse him of personal interference.

Or is this an example of a noble politician who's prepared to take decsisions and not hide behind politics?

Seems iffy to me.

I'm more concerned about the only financing Chrysler for another 30more days & GM for another 60.

(Unless they get their **** together)

Doesn't really bother me. The bailout money to the auto manufacturers was conditional, one of those conditions being the creation of a workable business plan for the future. Both GM & Chrysler failed to produce such a thing (in the eyes of the administration, anyway). The White House said "We can't work with this guy so you'll want to change him if we're to continue" and so out Wagoner went.

I've little issue with the money being conditional. It's like if you borrow $500 for rent from a friend and then he starts questioning your eating out and buying video games -- if you don't want your lender in your business, either don't borrow money or else pay it back so they don't have reason to be critiquing you. GM could have chose to refuse additional aid, keep their CEO and let the fates take them wherever. I wouldn't call this micro-managing either; Obama's talking about the head of a multi-billion dollar corporation which is requesting billions of dollars in government funds. He's not interviewing their receptionists or chosing which office plant rental firm they use.

Incidentally, the White House did the same thing with AIG. So this is nothing new.

No problems here. Someone has to be responsible for GM's current state of affairs. I'm actually a little surprised that Obama didn't call for Rick's head earlier.

I'm just not sure what side of the fence to come down on here. I think this one act, asking for the removal of the CEO, is justified and even necessary. At the same time I thought the executive branch, under the Bush administration, was wielding too much unchecked power.

...see this is what happens when we the people become we the stockholders. We need another branch of government - the Board of Directors.

When I read the title, I was expecting a thread on job prospects between CnC Milling and a managetorial(sp?) positions.

Quiet, you.

I was listening to Rush today over lunch and he was saying that Obama was forcing GM to abide by the union demands. Therefore, to Varrus, Obama is forcing GM to abide by the union demands.

Rush also mentioned that no auto makers could prosper in the US due to CAFE standards so expect Varrus to bring that up next.

Edited, Mar 30th 2009 4:08pm by Jophiel

Yeah. It's really a matter of choosing serial scapegoats at this point.

Yeah, but Smash, the UAW-- and the CEOs of their respective automobile companies --killed the goose that laid the golden eggs long ago, in the mid-60's I seem to recall. Oh, it seemed like a good idea at the time from their perspective, I'm sure. But quotas, early retirement pensions, health care until the grave, shoddy workmanship, institutionalized and purposeful early obsolesence of their product, and the car business in general selling to the American consumer vehicles without a view to the future (Hummers and SUVs for example). Add to that shareholders who got used to quarterly financials rather than yearly and the immediacy of profits NOW overrode any commonsense towards the long view.

This crisis is a long time in coming-- and I come from a family that hails from Detroit. While I am sympathetic to auto industry workers, their's is a legacy born from excess and greed 40+ years ago.

Totem