Free Markets, Free People


Bailing out … Brazil?

Every time I see one of these stories I just shake my head in wonder.

Obama and Congress are frothing at the mouth at those Wall Street types for paying out 18 billion in “bonuses”.  Of course, had Congress not acted like a panicked herd of wildebeast when Paulson came flapping around declaring the sky was falling, they might have written legislation which prevented such an occurrence.

But while they prefer to yell at others, the failure to be specific about what the money could be used was theirs – the Democratic Congress.

Well here’s round two.  The great, “we have to have it now or we’ll go under” auto bailout scam of 2008.  And guess what:

Right nowGeneral Motors plans to invest $1 billion in Brazil to avoid the kind of problems the U.S. automaker is facing in its home market, said the beleaguered car maker.

According to the president of GM Brazil-Mercosur, Jaime Ardila, the funding will come from the package of financial aid that the manufacturer will receive from the U.S. government and will be used to “complete the renovation of the line of products up to 2012.”

“It wouldn’t be logical to withdraw the investment from where we’re growing, and our goal is to protect investments in emerging markets,” he said in a statement published by the business daily Gazeta Mercantil.

So tell me, how many jobs will that billion create or preserve here, hmmm?

Hope and change.

~McQ

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

7 Responses to Bailing out … Brazil?

  • But, like the banks, when you put .. say a billion .. into a multi-national corporation like GM that has a budget of tens of billions more, exactly which billion went to Brazil ?  .. or in the case of the banks, for bonuses ?

    This points out why having the government as a stockholder is bad business, they assume the entire corporate budget is made up of their “billion” and they have the “law” on their side .. always.  It’s like having a “nagging in-law” .. maybe worse.

  • “It’s like having a “nagging in-law”…”

    Yep. Nothing worse than an uppity shareholder, as I am sure all those CEOs can testify to.  Shareholders should just let all those corporate wizards work their magic and not interfere with what happens to their money. I tremble at the thought of what damage those ignorant shareholders can do to great companies like GM, CitiBank, etc.

  • How is GM spending money in Brazil any worse than say…..Lightworker sending money overseas for abortions?

    The only thing GM et al is guilty of is having a bad tin ear when it comes to PR.

  • I can guess that those uppity union members are OK with the government giving money to GM, but not so OK with GM spending it where it will do GM the most good. 

  • “But instead they’d prefer to yell at others when in fact, the failure to be specific about that for which the money could be used was theirs.”

    Good Lord, is that a sentence?  It needs a serious phrase-ectomy.

  • Shark says:
    February 2, 2009 at 07:03
    How is GM spending money in Brazil any worse than say…..Lightworker sending money overseas for abortions?

    Or GW spending billions of our tax dollars in Africa?  It is all wrong and probably not constitutional.


michael kors outlet michael kors handbags outlet michael kors factory outlet