Posts Tagged ‘Romanian state’
US goes on to save local carmakers – how much is a local version possible?
The US car makers bailout passed the House of Representatives, but is yet to be voted in the Senate. So US carmakers will receive $14 billion to keep their businesses alive, and those in favor say this bailout will keep the US economy falling deeper into recession. I don’t understand why the three car makers, namely General Motors Corp, Ford Motor Co, and Chrysler LLC, haven’t done anything to protect themselves from the efects of the crisis. I understand the US state trying to protect the 250,000 people whose jobs would be lost if these three companies go burst – not to mention the 100,000 jobs in related businesses which would also suffer. But is the state continues to protect and act as a safety net for all these large US companies which are close to the edge and ready to fall, and pay hundreds of billions of dollars, this will only tell all those companies in trouble that the state would come and rescue. And they would feel less the need to really think and restructure their business and react to changing markets. Haven’t the carmakers foreseen tough times ahead? Well, I guess not. If it continues like this, the US’s private economy will be i the hands of the state. I wouldn’t want to imagine how would Romanian, with their recent communist experience, react to the state bailing out foreign companies which made money after buying former state-owned companies. Of course, it is not the case, although Dacia Renault is not feeling good – workers sent home for month, paif 85 percent of their salaries, production and ssales drop, etc- , but I was just trying to put the US picture into the Romanian frame. I would never imagine the Romanian state paying to save some local banking insitutions, buying toxic assets from them, then bailing out some local carmakers – which we don’t even have anymore, they are all foreign companies. It wouldn’t have the idea to do so in the first place, but what is more interesting, I think, is that, I’m sure, it wouldn’t pass the parliament vote, it would be too controversial, and too many would be against the state getting so much involved into the economy.
