MovieChat Forums > Capitalism: A Love Story (2009) Discussion > The bailout 'saved' the auto industry

The bailout 'saved' the auto industry

posted 13 years ago by Jumping_Elephant
5 replies | jump to latest

What I don't understand is that Michael Moore seems to espouse the same (dis)belief as one of his interviewees, the Sheriff of Detroit. The sheriff said this in the documentary: "Doesn't it seem kind of strange to you that they would seek a government bailout? I thought that's not what they do? I thought that the free market is that you sink or swim. I just saw them sink, and cry like babies and ask for hand-outs from everyone else."

Yet, let me pose this hypothetical scenario to you. Let's say Flint, Michigan was still the hub of the automobile industry. But let's say they were in extreme financial trouble, as they were in the recession. Would Moore have supported the bailout, knowing that without it, Flint would be reduced to the likes of a third world country?

I'm just trying to understand his position on this, because it seems really fuzzy to me.

*My lists: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur7367234/lists

[–] xfastfurious15 12 years ago

well if its based on the idea of a "free market" then Moore's position would be that the auto industry of flint, michigan should've "sunk". They failed, so why should they ask for hand outs when it was their own fault that they failed? It's fair.
And i agree with the interviewee.

[–] smoko 12 years ago

@Jumping_Elephant That is an interesting scenario! His opposition of bailouts vs. his love of Flint. Here's what I think would happen:
He would've supported a bailout that could save Flint... before he made C:ALS.

Now that he's made this documentary, he would oppose such a bailout, despite it supporting Flint. That's because it would make him look so hypocritical that he simply couldn't do it.

[–] gabby_bm 12 years ago

One could say that the bailout prevented the next big shots to take it over and improve it, thereby supporting and perpetuating the Big Three's management's incompetence.

Hostess was also too big to fail but they did. Now someone else is taking it over. let's see if they can make a horse race out of it or whether they will also sink the Twinkie.

"Oh that's nice, sweetie" = Grandma's version of "cool story, bro"
#3

[–] sascha-17 11 years ago

Doesn't it seem kind of strange to you that they would seek a government bailout? I thought that's not what they do? I thought that the free market is that you sink or swim. I just saw them sink, and cry like babies and ask for hand-outs from everyone else.

That was actually one of the best points made in the entire film. The banks wanted deregulated markets because it enabled them to make even more money. But when their unchecked greed pretty much destroyed the system (and them), they went to the government for a bailout. Wow.. that's like those idiots arguing for small government and at the same time saying "get your hands off my Medicare!"

S.

[–] cwente2 11 years ago

You're looking through the telescope from the wrong end. It isn't up to the companies in trouble not to ask for help from wherever they can get it. That's called doing your job. Executives are not political theorists. They are, rather, taxpayers with personal responsibilities, often big tax payers. It is the job of the politicians, rather, to tell the execs -- no! And therein lies the problem.

The bailouts did not "save the auto industry" -- they saved the unions. Without the Democrat inspired bailouts, the bankruptcy laws, through the courts, would have saved the auto industry as they have saved thousands of other industries, for decades. But, then, the labor unions would have had to make some sacrifice as well as the investors. But, the Democrats "golden fleece" has been union support (money & volunteers -- mostly money) for as long as the bankruptcy laws have been in existence. So, true to form, Obama broke the law (cheated the investors by, effectively, nullifying legal contracts) to please (and grease) his financial reciprocators. . . Surprised? That kind of stuff's a way of life for him.

Btw, those small government advocates are, indeed, concerned about their Medicare payments -- considering it's been their own money which the government has been promising to give back to them at the appointed time -- in return for their votes, of course! Good luck with that.