from Reuters

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, says the administration will likely use part of the $700 billion fund established in October to stabilize the financial services sector, rather than pushing the companies into bankruptcy, as some lawmakers have urged.

"That would be my expectation and I think all the signals coming from the White House are that they know that bankruptcy is not an option and that (stabilization) funds are the only recourse that they have," Pelosi said at a news conference.

So who's got it right? Will the administration force a bankruptcy or will they just give them enough cash to become Obama's problem?

They will be Obama's problem one way or another...

given the lack of engeneering graduates and the general American preference for foreign cars (in some geographic areas) it will be a problem for the person who replaces him in 4-8 years.

Chris

They will be Obama's problem one way or another...

given the lack of engeneering graduates and the general American preference for foreign cars (in some geographic areas) it will be a problem for the person who replaces him in 4-8 years.

Chris

You know, I was all about science and engineering in high school. I took physics and computer programming and got all As in both. Of course in 99 when I started college the tech bubble was bursting and record numbers of engineers jobs were being sent to India and China where they work for much less. That really made me stop and look at whether I should go into those fields. I didn't. I would go back tomorrow to become an engineer, but I fear the government will continue to award foreign companies and fail to create an environment that encourages companies to hire domestically. Sigh.

I keep hearing from people in the media supposedly 'in the know' that bankruptcy is not an option for Detroit. Could someone 'splain to me why that is? It seems to have worked for the airline industry. As far as Pelosi goes the unions own her so anything she says is irrelevant.

>>"It seems to have worked for the airline industry."<<

The gi-mungeous difference is that with the airlines, all you as a consumer buy is a ticket and a seat for x hour(s).

If they go bankrupt, there are pentiful other choices, and when they fly again, it's not that big of a deal to drop another -say- $200 and try them again.

With an automobile, you buy a complicated product that costs anywhere from $20,000 to $50,000 or more, that you keep for x year(s) and xxx,000 miles, that will at some point require specialized service, parts and warranty claims.

I keep hearing from people in the media supposedly 'in the know' that bankruptcy is not an option for Detroit. Could someone 'splain to me why that is? It seems to have worked for the airline industry. As far as Pelosi goes the unions own her so anything she says is irrelevant.

Because Pelosi is a Democrat, and D's never try to save a company and fat cat executives while screwing the wage-earners. That's the flip answer. The long one is that there would be no fast, clean bankruptcy, that so many people are tied to the Big 3 in the US that a bankruptcy would almost certainly send us into another Great Depression, if for nothing else than the domino effect on other auto companies.

The union didn't design the Aztek, the union didn't choose to produce vehicles with substandard interiors, and the union didn't decide that using loose factory build tolerances would reduce costs even if &#036;h&#33; gets asembled with glaring misalignments. The union therefore should not pay the price for GM's poor foresight.

As far as Pelosi goes the unions own her so anything she says is irrelevant.

It is my understanding that Pelosi has close ties with the military hardware producers and is not particularly liked by labor or the progressive movement.

Progressives don't have a problem with Pelosi...the House has been doing their job thus far...it's more Harry Reid and the Senate that have produced criticism.