Were The Automotive Bailouts Instrumental In Helping The US Economy?

Were The Automotive Bailouts Instrumental In Helping The US Economy?

The public is far more supportive of the auto industry bailouts than the government’s decision to bail out distressed financial giants in 2009, according to a Harris poll released this morning.

About 45% of those polled said the federal government’s decision to extend more than $77 billion in emergency loans and bankruptcy financing to General Motors and Chrysler in 2009 “helped” the economy, according to the online poll conducted by market research firm Harris Interactive between March 12 and 19. Harris surveyed 2,451 adults and found that about 29% of Americans say the auto bailouts “hurt” the economy. About 5% were unsure.



Read Article

SteveSteve - 4/9/2012 4:08:15 PM
+3 Boost
All we can bicker about is what each of us *believes*. There's no way to prove that the Yay or Nay crowd is actually correct. So please, feel free to bicker away!!! :-)


vdivvdiv - 4/9/2012 4:50:48 PM
+3 Boost
The only thing I am beakering is my coffee :p

A related and I think currently more relevant question would be have the US auto companies learned a lesson and changed what they do and how.


LexSucksLexSucks - 4/9/2012 6:38:55 PM
-5 Boost
"Were the automotive bailouts instrumental in helping the us economy?"

- With 1 out of 10 jobs in the US relating to the U.S Auto industry. Yes the bailout was instrumental in helping the economy recover. Without those jobs how do you think that the economy would be doing?

What people "believe"? Who cares? I get it. Downplaying the bailout's effectiveness helps the anti Obama crowd sleep at night. That or saying that the bailout is 100% GWB. But if the Economy was still super crappy right now? The Bailout and Obama would both be labeled as one, and both would be blamed. That's just how 009 and his ilk rolls.


PUGPROUDPUGPROUD - 4/9/2012 7:09:09 PM
+6 Boost
If the companies went Chapter 11, they would have reorganized on a smaller scale, contracts would be rewritten more favorably, and the outcome may have been the same but without government intrusion. Yes the process may have been emotionally more painful but as vdiv suggests people would have learned from their failures rather than expecting a bail out again down the road.


SteveSteve - 4/10/2012 5:16:22 PM
+4 Boost
blazinboy writes "being bailed out again down the road is something only Wall street has the privilige of expecting."

Um, Chrysler has been bailed out a second time. Do you actually believe this was the FINAL round of feeding the pigs at the trough?


valhallakeyvalhallakey - 4/10/2012 12:46:49 AM
+2 Boost
Certainly helped keep large scale manufacturing in the US. One of the last areas we do this is in auto manufacturing (Aviation being the other). Would have been sad to loose that.


mini22mini22 - 4/11/2012 7:53:14 PM
+2 Boost
Putting aside the conservative movement on this site the general public has spoken and echo how I feel.Bailing out the banks was a lot more annoying and frustrating to people then bailing out the auto companies. It's as simple as that! Where puproud is wrong is that these companies would not have gone chapter 11 necesarily. More likely they would have gone chapter 7. There were no companies in 2008 or 2009 that were willing to invest in failing Chrysler and GM. And we all know most likely what a company like Bain Capitol would have done.We also know who has been invoolved in Bain Capitol. The same guy who is installing special elevators for his multiple Cadillacs at his California beach house property where his wife drives a different one every day.Enough said.
Copyright 2026 AutoSpies.com, LLC