Government Forces CEO Of Private Company To Resign

It’s come to this. Private companies basically being run by the government.

The Obama administration asked Rick Wagoner, the chairman and CEO of General Motors, to step down and he agreed, a White House official said. …
Wagoner’s departure is one of the remarkable strings attached to a new aid package the administration plans to offer GM.
The White House confirmed Wagoner was leaving at the government’s behest after The Associated Press reported his immediate departure, without giving a reason. …
Industry sources had said the White House planned very tough medicine, which turned out to be an understatement. And it went to the very top. The measures to be imposed by the government will have a dramatic effect on workers, unions, suppliers, retirees and the communities where plants are located, the sources said.

Obama apologists will no doubt point out that this is a condition of yet another bailout for GM, and that if Wagoner didn’t want to resign then his company shouldn’t have taken the bailout money.
That’s all well and good, but let’s keep a few things in mind:
First, this is exactly why big government liberals like Obama want these giant corporations on the government dole. Because once on the dole, the government can essentially run them by pulling strings on the money they’re handing out. This is why the government bailed out nearly 500 banks across the nation with the TARP program even though most of those banks would have been just fine without the money. It’s because once they took the money, the government could turn around and start pulling strings.
Government dependency means government control. And the politicians love to control stuff.
Second, let’s also remember that Geithner’s much-ballyhooed economic rescue plan includes using TARP money to essentially initiate hostile takeovers of companies the government feels aren’t being run in a proper fashion. Which is pretty much a blank check for Obama and future Presidents to nationalize companies at will.
Think about how much power that gives the government. For the most part, the government wouldn’t even have to nationalize most companies in order to start pulling strings. The government could simply hint at nationalizing them in order to get them to toe the line.
And that’s scary, scary stuff.
The government shouldn’t be forcing private sector employees to resign like this. And before anyone says it’s ok because it’s just a condition of a bailout, remember that we shouldn’t be bailing these companies out either.
On a related note, only 14% of Americans feel the government can run GM better than GM has run GM. So this isn’t exactly the “will of the people” Obama is exercising here.

Tags: , ,


«
»
  • http://Array sayanything-5371

    Lean and mean? Obama took 500 staff with him to the G20 meeting.

    That’s 500 hotel rooms and 1500 meals a day. Pretty soon you could be talking about some real money. Why did he need ANYONE, since he has magical powers?

  • robert108

    What did GM have to lose by taking the free money?

    The trust and confidence of the American people, which will cost them exponentially more than any taxpayer money they got.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Lean and mean? Obama took 500 staff with him to the G20 meeting.

    Most of them are there to write stuff for his teleprompter.

  • Hannitized

    Adam provided facts, and thinks Rob is going to pay attention.

    Adam, the quicker you learn the better off you are going to be. No conservative (laugh) on this site cares about facts. They make assumptions from their gut, or they make it up.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 Dino2

    Good. Now he should start rounding up the past & present Wall Street execs and putting them in shackles after confiscating every cent they have.

  • docdave

    What did GM have to lose by taking the free money?

    What you can lose when you become overly indebted to your creditors is control of your company, a well known accounting axiom. Apparently that is what has happened to GM and AIG.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    I would have preferred the money went to to either education, the war on poverty,

    Are you aware of any evidence that more spending in the past has actually improved educational performance or reduced the poverty level?

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Wow, a revelation. “The Bailout was stupid.”

    What did GM have to lose by taking the free money? Why wouldn’t they take it?

  • bustoff

    If he had run his company well he wouldn’t have had to resign.

    Indeed. Wagoner is paying the price for his role in reducing a once-proud GM to panhandling for government handouts.

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

    So we are still fighting to keep these union job going eh?
    We should all go to a car lot tell the car company we are going to drive off with a new car since we own them anyways.

  • Hannitized

    First, this is exactly why big government liberals like Obama want these giant corporations on the government dole. Because once on the dole, the government can essentially run them by pulling strings on the money they’re handing out.

    Bush did the same thing ya dope.

  • bill-tb

    It has a proper name, it’s called Fascism.

    Remember the leftards calling Bush a Fascist? I doubt they can even define what it is.

    You are going to buy that electric coffin or walk.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    I would say the bankruptcy judge should have fired the guy.

    I guess we’ll find out if The Messiah can run GM better than the guys that were running it.

    On a related note I heard on the radio news that Obama said today that they need to have a viable company that’s mean and lean after this is all done.

    Does this mean the UAW has been fired as well?

  • Houston

    I’m curious to see how this pans out as well. I understand the workers and former workers expecting what they worked for, but unfortunately it is an impossible situation as is for GM.

    So do they continue to make cars simply to pay the pension of former employees? What about the new workers?

    It’s like a huge pyramid scheme.

  • Rezistik

    Wow, a revelation. “The Bailout was stupid.”

    What did GM have to lose by taking the free money? Why wouldn’t they take it?

    Control.

  • marla

    I think ALL of us who have an opinion should GET INVOLVED at the local level. If we can take the time to blog…we should make time to rally our community and do something positive where WE can make a difference. Our individual communities add up to who our state elects to make these decisions…right?

  • robert108

    It’s the unions who should be fired; if we want a domestic auto industry, that is.

  • http://www.thephoenixprinciple.com/ adam hartung

    This is what happens when you lose your position as #1. It doesn’t take long for people to start envisioning a world without you. GM started on the road to irrelevant years ago by focusing internally rather than on the market – missing all major shifts and becoming also-ran. Obama’s team is telling everyone (auto and banking) that if you can’t prove you know where the market is heading and demonstrate you can get back in front, then there’s little reason to support you. Read more http://www.ThePhoenixPrinciple.com

  • sc

    Does that make Obama the new CEO of GM?

  • Rezistik

    The bailout was a stupid idea but it took two to tango, again they didn’t have to take the bailout. If he had run his company well he wouldn’t have had to resign.

  • robert108

    Bush did the same thing ya dope.

    Another outright lie from you, ya dope.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Rez, do you think that a bankruptcy judge would let them do whatever they wanted with the company after they filed?

  • http://www.rabidamerican.net/ Rabid American

    If B.O. can fire a civilian, then I will exercise my powers (like in kind) and fire HIM!!!

  • Rezistik

    I’ve already said I considered the bailout a stupid move, it didn’t work with Hoover, and it was wildly unpopular with a majority of both Liberals and Conservatives. Not to mention I would have preferred the money went to to either education, the war on poverty, and even just hadn’t been used at all.
    (I would say tax breaks but we need to work to maintaining a budget surplus so we can begin paying off the debts we have)

    However, I still think that seeing as these companies did decide, they had a choice, and since they couldn’t adequately run their companies they don’t deserve the control. Of course if they would like to promptly return the money then I’m fine with them doing whatever the hell they like. (Of course within reason)

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    I think the proper honorific is “Dear Leader.”

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Adam,

    If GM is such an awful company, then why is Obama bothering to try and save it? Why not let GM go out of business and be replaced by better-run competitors?

    Outside of the fact that the better-run competitors aren’t in the thrall of the unions, and so GM must be propped up so that it, in turn, can continue to prop up the UAW?

  • http://suitepotato.blogspot.com/ sayanything-4808

    sc:

    Does that make Obama the new CEO of GM?

    He already thinks he is the CEO of America instead of prez as it is, so why not?

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    On a related note I heard on the radio news that Obama said today that they need to have a viable company that’s mean and lean after this is all done.

    Lean and mean? Obama took 500 staff with him to the G20 meeting.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development