You've no doubt heard by now that the White House forced the resignation of Rick Wagoner, the CEO of General Motors, and are essentially forcing Chrysler to merge with Fiat an Italian automaker.Now, like I've said with the banks, I'm all for equity holders or capital backers taking a hard line with the entities that they are funding, but even I've got to tap the brakes on these most recent moves. Obama and the D's continue to echo the fact that they have no intention in having the govt run these businesses but forcing out the CEO of one and pressing the merger of another sure sounds like the govt calling the shots, especially since it's rumored the boards were against both.
My preference would have been for Geithner and Obama to either provide the funding based on the feasibility of the plans GM and Chrylser put forth or either deny the funding and wordsmith an orderly bankruptcy where they can shed their crushing debt and legacy contracts and move quickly back to free enterprise. Now to be sure, I think Wagoner has been pedestrian at best, but as most businesspeople know CEO's are figureheads who garner way to much credit and bread (I'm looking at you Jack Welch) when things are good and too much blame and still too much bread when things are bad.
But his 'pedestrianess' if you will, is something that should be evaluated by GM's board, however 'cronyistic' their makeup. The govt really has no place making operational decisions and as a progressive capitalist this kinda scares me. I wish there were a few other business D's sounding off on this truly slippery slope.
