Race and gender at play in auto dealership closures?

July 22, 2010

Or was it payback for rural counties not voting for Obama in 2008? The BlogProf looks at the report by Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) Inspector General Neal Barofsky. It certainly seems … suggestive.

Hope and Change?

(via Sister Toldjah)

UPDATE: Ed at Hot Air takes a different angle, seeing the closures as an example of making economic decisions based on the needs of political theater, in this case the need to demonstrate shared sacrifice.

Advertisements

We don’t need no steenking bailout!

July 23, 2009

Unlike GM and Chrysler, Ford refused the crack turned down the federal bailout money. Unlike GM and Chrysler, Ford managed to adapt and stay out of bankruptcy court and didn’t need President Obama to rip off bondholders.

And, unlike GM and Chrysler, Ford has managed to turn a profit. Imagine that.

Helped by a lightened debt load, Ford Motor Co. posted a surprise second-quarter profit of $2.8 billion Thursday, following the worst loss in company history a year earlier. Shares rose more than 6 percent in morning trading.

The net profit ends a string of four straight quarterly losses for the nation’s second-largest automaker, which has gained U.S. market share at the expense of crosstown rivals Chrysler Group LLC and General Motors Co., both of which spent time under bankruptcy court supervision. Ford last went into the black in the first quarter of 2008, with net profit of $70 million.

However, excluding its debt reduction and other items, Dearborn, Mich.-based Ford would have reported a quarterly loss, though smaller than Wall Street expected.

Okay, so GAAP accounting rules helped create the profit. Ignore them. Even the smaller-than-expected loss is a good sign, often the first in a genuine turnaround.

It’s also a sign that sound business practices and making cars people want to buy is better than becoming Congressional Motors: