bladerunner
Banned Idiot
you took my post out of context. I wasn't criticizing american cars, I was criticizing the view that in order for an enterprize to justify its existance, it has to be profitable all the time. American cars had made big strides towards improving their fuel efficiency. That was the result of heavy investment that went in R&D and renewing/replacing their plants. Now amercian auto industry can survive if not flourish thanks to the action of US government.
But to free-market fanatics, leaving amercian auto giants like GM to its own fate would somehow make this happen because market is a magician, it is not investment and human engnieers that could make better cars, it's the magical "profit motive" . I merely pointed out how far detached that kind of view is from reality. All major captalist governments invest/subsidize/protect their key industries. A post-industrlized economy is highly coopertive and interwoven. You have to invest intensively and consistently for a long time to build a industry like automobile manufacture. To suggest, just because an industry is bad at generating profit at one point in time, it is "dead weight" that should be rid off is the narrow, unrealistic view of "free-market" school of economists.
Hummer's purchase was never going to get the chinese regulators approval , and so it proved.
Volvo sales in America under Chinese ownership is losing money and sales have decreased to an all time low.