The Ethanol Papers - Paperturn manuscript - Flipbook - Page 599
building of additional plants would have increased and they may have acquired
some of the old plants for re-fitting.
Now, some 4 years later, although the loan has been repaid, what do we have
to show for it? Two American brand car companies who are more interested in
the Chinese market than the American market (yeah, yeah, I understand the
value of keeping the brands alive in America in order to make them more attractive to Chinese buyers who think they are getting some genuine American
items. I worked for a long time in the garment industry, I know the drill). So we
put up $80 billion for that? As I said before, ExxonMobil could have done that.
(Read the editorial I wrote in November 2008, “The Gasoline Companies
Should Fund the Big Three Bailout”.
What if ExxonMobil would have bailed out GM and Chrysler? Wouldn’t that have
been heroic? I think so; I think it would have been Homerifically heroic. ExxonMobil could have milked that puppy for 50 years: “We Saved the American
Auto Industry!” Wow, no one would even think of bringing up the Exxon Valdez
oil spill after that. What an incredible marketing and public relations coup it
would have been. No, instead Bryce and the other oil shills just whine about
Archer Daniels Midland’s comparatively minuscule profits.
Even CATO Institute agrees that the government bailout wasn’t worth the effort.
See: Truth About GM-Chrysler Bailouts.
In the meantime, all of GM’s common stock shareholders and Chrysler’s bondholders lost everything. How many millions is that? How many billions is that?
When do these investors get bailed out?
Robert Bryce’s entire recitation on the unfairness of subsidies given to the ethanol industry is nothing more than exaggerated hypocritical, doublespeak.
CLICK image to play video
