We're concerned with a powerful government who is telling General Motors now, maybe, what they can charge for their automobiles. Indeed, if the government owns 61 percent, they can do that.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
We just put General Motors in the hands of people who can't even run our own government.
What really went wrong is that General Motors has had this philosophy from the beginning that what's good for General Motors is good for the country. So, their attitude was, 'We'll build it and you buy it. We'll tell you what to buy. You just buy it.'
The problem is that the automobile companies are not independent entities capable of pursuing their own interests. Rather, they are owned and controlled by organizations that are much more heavily invested in oil.
For years I thought what was good for our country was good for General Motors and vice versa. The difference did not exist. Our company is too big. It goes with the welfare of the country.
So long as TARP money is wrapped up in GM, the company will never shake its 'Government Motors' image. That label, as competitors and GM employees are keenly aware, is code for one thing: 'GM is a failure.'
If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1,000 MPG.
We can't go to people who have lost their job at GM and say, 'Oh, by the way, we are going to pay money to build a road here or inoculate children there,' unless we can demonstrate that it is in America's interest. I happen to think it is.
Our thinking behind these agreements is that we want all jobs in General Motors to be good jobs.
GE sells more than 96 percent of its products to the private sector, where America's future must be built. But government can help business invest in our shared future.
Our goal is to make General Motors the most valuable automotive company. Clearly, that is having sustainable profitability and driving great returns for our shareholders.