Quote Originally Posted by Jer View Post
Actually, in a round about sort of way, they are. In a free market when a company gets too large to satisfy their customers (if they allow such growth) then they eventually revamp or fail. There are often smaller companies who can actually build a better product or have a better idea but aren't as successful because of volume. Once that larger company steps back or fails then it allows for these new innovations from smaller companies to take flight and experience growth. This growth means more jobs and eventually the growth will see better products get to market in larger numbers and so on. The problem is we bailed out a LOT of companies who were solely responsible for the hit our economy has taken and in turn the free market hasn't been able to work and we've basically rewarded meritocracy and poor innovation which has made our country less successful when compared to what our competitor countries are manufacturing. So, in a way, our government is partly responsible for poor products by not allowing for the companies to fail (or greatly cut back) which allows for the next guy with a better mousetrap to flourish. On the world stage our close minded approach to commerce has cost us greatly making us unable to compete with with the rest of the world w/solid products.
Just to illaberate a little on your point. If GM was allowed to fall, fail, restructure. And they sold off some of the makes that they gobbled up over the years. Instead of getting rid of say Pontiac all together. Imagine if a company that liked making cars took it over and started producing a kick ass car like they used to? Modern technology in a classic all steal design or something all new even. That would put GM in a position to innovate or fail again. That is what makes the free market move forward. Hell I think we already to a point where we don't need government. We can take care of ourselves. At least most of us. Maybe that is what they are afraid of?
IDK I might be full of it?