[cdynaco]

Originally Posted by jbcrzn

My first reaction with this year's earlier events was very similar, in that I would rather buy from a private or publicly traded company, not Government Motors. However, there are a few things that play into vehicular decisions for me, and one would be where do we stop with the government funding? If I decided that I was not going to buy a car from a government funded company (no matter to what extent), then I would have to remove Ford from the list, as they accepted money for future alternative fuel development from the DOE. Those are costs they are not having to front the developmental monies for, so, while I do not like they did that, it would not be enough for me to remove them from my list.

Those are two separate issues. Government steering private industry (such as for better fuel efficiency) is one thing. Sort of a 'funded mandate' vs Federal 'unfunded mandates' that the State's often complain about. Giving up control of your company to socialists in D.C. - that fires your CEO, forces closure of thousands of independently owned businesses (Dealerships) that employed thousands of families and vendors, and tells you what you can and cannot earn at your job - is another thing entirely.

Ford was not part of the TARP bailout funds.

The TARP bailout required GM & Chrysler to give up a percentage of ownership & control to the Gov in the form of preferred shares (which drastically diluted [harmed] the common shareholders - which include millions of private citizens that held GM common. Chrysler was privately held by Cerberus at the time as you know.). This is how the Administration could force Rick Wagoner out of his CEO post. And this is in stark contrast to when the Gov made an interest bearing loan to Iaccoca without requiring an ownership stake.

The Gov has no such control over Ford's Mulally at this time because no Ford shares have been given to the Gov.