Was taxpayer-owned GM right to give away a Corvette to a Detroit pitcher?

[Rob]

So I'm really curious what everyone thinks about this. I have my opinion, but I'll wait to post it until there have been other responses:

------------------------------------------------------------
Was taxpayer-owned GM right to give away a Corvette to a Detroit pitcher?

USA Today
Jun 05, 2010

Now that General Motors is taxpayer owned, does it really make sense for it to be giving away free Chevrolet Corvettes to rich and happy, albeit disappointed, professional baseball players?

It's an interesting question that was raised by Nick Bunkley, writing in the New York Times.

As Drive On reported Thursday, the Detroit Tigers gave a Corvette -- base price $75,505 for the Z06 version -- to pitcher Armado Galarraga after an umpire's bad call cost him a perfect game. Millions of Americans have lost of their jobs in the past couple years, faced illnesses without health insurance, had their homes foreclosed, and no one gave them a free sports car.

Before 2009, no one would have batted an eye at GM giving a free car to ball player. But the automaker's bankruptcy last year left it about 60% owned by the federal government -- you and me.

"A free sports car for a Detroit Tigers baseball player was not among the reasons the government saved General Motors from financial collapse," Bunkley writes. The view is shared:

Full Story: Was taxpayer-owned GM right to give away a Corvette to a Detroit pitcher? - Drive On: A conversation about the cars and trucks we drive - USATODAY.com

[Dad]

No reason for an individual or corporation to make a decision on his or her own, it should be made by the government.

If we are buying into that I feel sorry for mankind.

[vetteboy86]

I'm sure those who think it was incorrect wouldn't mind if they had been the recipient. If it is an elaborate marketing scheme to create more value for the corvette and GM/Chevy, than i'm wishy washy about it.

The only issue that comes to mind, is that the guy really didn't need it. He's got Plenty of money, but rightly so he is earning it. How about start a lottery of citizens and give Corvettes away to normal Joes like myself.

Hey is that plumber guy still around? Wasn't his name Joe?

[Mike G]

Better to see 'gv't financed' GM give a Vette to a baseball pitcher than giving away all the printed up money to Goldman Sachs through AIG.
That journalist really doesn't care about what REALLY counts for the country, does he? Can he give us an update on the 3 taxpayer-funded wars underway?

I'm looking forward to GM getting out of this situation and selling more Chevy's

[LLC5]

Find gun (sounds of doors/cabinets opening and closing, dropping of gun twice), load gun, raise foot, pull trigger.

[Evolution1980]

This is an interesting question. I think the answer will be somewhat evenly divided between "yeah, OK" and "hell no!"

While GM may be "government owned" and thus in some people's mind "owned by the people", I don't think one can really say that "we the people didn't approve giving away the car, so it shouldn't have been done." Just as "we the people" don't approve government gifts to anyone.
I don't recall being asked for my/our approval in giving aid/gifts/whatever to other countries or certain state figures. I certainly wasn't directly asked if I wanted to sell or outright give arms to foreign countries. Basically, short of an elected position, I'm not really directly consulted about anything the government does, whether it's giving things away to already-privileged people or bombing an under-privileged people.

You might think that my relation to "giving someone a car" is a hell of a lot different than "giving arms to / bombing another country", but the reason is to easily understand what I'm saying. The government does what it wants and if it wants to give a car to a single person, then so be it.
If anything, 1) It's publicity for GM and the Corvette marque. (there is no such thing as bad publicity). 2) That's one more car that ran down the BG assembly line and one more car that contributed to keeping people at work. 3) The new recipient will probably tire of the car or not even use it and dump it on the market for dirt cheap making it more readily available for me to get my hands on!

[NORTY]

So I'm really curious what everyone thinks about this. I have my opinion, but I'll wait to post it until there have been other responses:

------------------------------------------------------------
Was taxpayer-owned GM right to give away a Corvette to a Detroit pitcher?

USA Today
Jun 05, 2010

Now that General Motors is taxpayer owned, does it really make sense for it to be giving away free Chevrolet Corvettes to rich and happy, albeit disappointed, professional baseball players?

It's an interesting question that was raised by Nick Bunkley, writing in the New York Times.

As Drive On reported Thursday, the Detroit Tigers gave a Corvette -- base price $75,505 for the Z06 version -- to pitcher Armado Galarraga after an umpire's bad call cost him a perfect game. Millions of Americans have lost of their jobs in the past couple years, faced illnesses without health insurance, had their homes foreclosed, and no one gave them a free sports car.

Before 2009, no one would have batted an eye at GM giving a free car to ball player. But the automaker's bankruptcy last year left it about 60% owned by the federal government -- you and me.

"A free sports car for a Detroit Tigers baseball player was not among the reasons the government saved General Motors from financial collapse," Bunkley writes. The view is shared:

Full Story: Was taxpayer-owned GM right to give away a Corvette to a Detroit pitcher? - Drive On: A conversation about the cars and trucks we drive - USATODAY.com

GM has repaid all Gov't loans. It is no longer "gov't owned" in as much as being financed. Now, if you were to say "GM is owned by the Gov't via regulations and unions." you may very well have a point.
I guess it could have been worse~ Galarraga could have received a Porsche...(at least it put Bowling Green to work.)