The Lions, Eminem without Dre, the cars…

When the government was bailing out all the financial institutions, as I understood it a lot of the problem was if one goes under, others are in trouble because they would default on securities and that would hurt the others. Businessweek says a similar domino argument is coming from the pro-automaker bailout lobby.

But if GM goes under, doesn’t that mean less competition for Ford and Chrysler which means higher profits? And if GM does go under, wouldn’t some of their plants get bought up to make Toyota’s or Honda’s at dirt cheap bankruptcy prices? Foreign automakers could buy the plants, employ Americans without the auto union albatross that’s driving our companies under (that and crappy cars). If that did happen the Joe-the-Car-Builders wouldn’t be out of jobs, they might lose their pension and make less money but they’ll still be working.

I’m not an expert, so maybe I’m missing something here, but here’s my no bailout scenario: GM goes under, like tomorrow. Not sure were Chrysler stands, but we’ll say they stay open for a bit. Everyone who insists on buying American now buys Chrsyler’s and Fords, profits are up and maybe they become solvent. Foreign automakers buy 2/3 of GM plants and start making decent cars in them. They’ll probably even keep making some of the brands with some valuable recognition (ie Cadillacs for the rappers). Two years from now 70% of autoworkers still have jobs and it hasn’t cost the taxpayers anything. Alternative is we bailout, GM keeps losing money and eating into Ford/Chrysler revenue and we’re right back here next year.

The Pistons are okay, but they shouldn’t have traded Chauncy.