- The Washington Times - Sunday, November 27, 2005

General Motors’ plant closings will no doubt deepen America’s pessimism about its economy, even as other automakers here build plants and sell cars like crazy.

The sheer size of this megacorporation, still a major automaker, and the magnitude of its cutbacks — laying off 30,000 workers and shutting all or part of 12 manufacturing plants — is enough to cast a pall over an economy still trying to shake off voter anxieties about its recovery.

But this is a huge, highly diversified economy that produces $12 trillion worth of goods and services annually and will certainly survive GM’s latest downsizing, as long as we pursue the kind of capital investment, savings and tax-cut incentives that have made our economy one of the world’s strongest.

The GM announcement should have been no surprise. The company that once manufactured more than half of all cars and trucks sold in the United States has seen its market share shrivel to 26 percent and has more than $4 billion in losses in North America alone. Its stock value has plunged. Its debt rating is near junk-bond status.

GM has never been able to shake its image as an overweight, slow-moving behemoth whose huge bureaucracy prevented competition with its slimmer, quicker and far-more-efficient rivals. To its credit, GM has made management and plant operations changes, eliminating overpadded middle management that took forever to make marketing decisions while its fleeter rivals, Toyota and Honda, outraced them.



So, last week, GM said it will close six assembly plants in Michigan, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Georgia, Ohio and Ontario, Canada, and will close or shrink another half-dozen parts plants elsewhere by 2008.

It’s not Americans aren’t buying fewer cars or the U.S. auto industry shrinking. “Sales in the United States have continued to surge for the largest Japanese automakers, which include Toyota, Honda and Nissan Motor Co.,” Sholnn Freeman, reported in The Washington Post last week.

We’re buying more cars and trucks and more vehicle plants are being built in America — they’re just not GM’s.

Toyota, for example, seems to announce a new plant opening here about every other year. Honda can’t seem to keep up with consumer demand for its most popular models. These are well-engineered cars made in America by American workers.

“In recent years, the Japanese have consistently beaten GM, Ford and Chrysler to the market in growing vehicle segments, such as soft-riding car-like SUVs and gas-electric hybrids,” The Post reported.

Many things have contributed to GM’s problems, particularly its lethargy and resistance to needed management changes, downsizing to bring costs in line with market share and increased outsourcing. But in the end, it product quality and consumer choice ultimately led to their woes.

Unfortunately, many workers will suffer due to GM’s fall from its once powerful position, but this is a company that has the ability to bounce back, and I think that can happen.

Downsizing, however late, is the right short-term medicine as GM goes about finding ways to produce better cars at less cost through smarter technology, robotics and, where necessary, outsourcing. To start, it might look closer at how its Japanese rivals run their plants and build cars here. Japan succeeded decades ago by studying U.S. plant and marketing practices. Maybe GM should do the same — study the competition.

What we should not do is ask the federal government to shore up and subsidize a weak company that must make fundamental top-to-bottom changes.

It’s called “industrial policy,” and Phyllis Borzi, a George Washington University professor of labor policies and practices, wants the feds to step in and save the company with federal aid. “Other countries help industries to modernize and get into a position to compete, and we don’t,” she told The Post.

We certainly need to help displaced GM workers every way we can, and the government will — from unemployment benefits to job-retraining programs. But subsidizing failing businesses is not the way to go. Just look at countries that have tried.

For several decades, Japan stuck to its “too big to fail” policies as it propped up failing banks and other businesses, only to fall into a long and costly economic slump.

Taking a page out of American Economics 101, Japan has in the last several years encouraged mergers and buyouts, and yes, even allowing weak firms to fail. And its economy has turned around dramatically.

Europe, on the other hand, has stuck with the old “industrial policy” of business subsidies and welfare-state benefits for its workers, resulting in decades of 10 percent unemployment, anemic 1-to-2 percent economic growth, and a persistent brain-drain of the best and the brightest workers, who fled the Continent for better opportunities in the global economy.

GM can work its way out of this mess without a federal bailout, and last week made some tough but necessary changes to put itself back on the road to recovery. I bet they succeed.

Donald Lambro, chief political correspondent of The Washington Times, is a nationally syndicated columnist.

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

 

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide