Debate Info

Yes No
Debate Score:9
Total Votes:9
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 Yes (2)
 No (4)

Debate Creator

wpillor(58) pic

Should the Fed bailout the Big 3?


Side Score: 3


Side Score: 6
2 points

As much as I hate this idea, I don't think the government can afford to let the Big 3 fail. I read recently that the auto industry accounts for 10% of the jobs in America, and at a time where companies are laying people off left and right I think that not bailing them out could prove to be disastrous to our economy. However, I agree that these funds should have very strict conditions tied to them and we need to have a viability plan for these companies to demonstrate how they will modify their business models to actually return to profitability in the future.

Side: yes
1 point

I agree. I think it's a shame that we have to do this, but think that the current state of the economy is so precarious that we need to bail out these companies. I am very afraid that we're moving into a socialist economy, but I don't see any other way to keep these companies afloat without injecting huge sums of capital into them.

Side: yes
1 point

Even though 10% of the jobs in America are linked to the auto industry, the American taxpayer is accepted to bailout these idiots multiple number of times. When is America going to realize that GM is failing and that we must stop allowing GM to fall into the GOLDEN PARACHUTE every time they fail?

This is GM's

Total equity ▼ US$ −86.154 billion (2008). This is only 2008. They are going to be a zombie company for years to come.

Side: No
3 points

I personally support a laissez-faire type of goverment industry relationship. I think that in order to stay on top, American companies need to compete successfully globally, now more than ever. If our cars (like many other things) are being outsourced or simply out-done by foreign companies so be it. Americans basically started the auto industry and now the rest of the world can have it. We need to stick to what we're good at. Mainly, thinking of new ways, new innovations, and forms of travel for this new century. I think that instead of bailing out the auto industries the FED should use the money to re-vamp public transportation systems, mainly amtrak, in order to be more appealing to a larger number of commuters. If the trains were cutting edge and faster more people would commute with them. Also, put some of that money into the education systems. As American students fall more and more behind globally in the areas of math and science our future will lose its ability to create and innovate these new industries (i.e. alternative energies), something we've been good at in the past and something that we will need to continue to be good at in the future in order to maintain our status as the global superpower. Whether you agree or not, 34billion dollars is a lot of taxpayer money and the FED could do a lot of other, more beneficial, things with it. Bottom line; I dont want my tax dollars going to private industries because it makes the $US lose its value globally, which is exactly what we've been seeing over the past couple of years.

Supporting Evidence: Finally, some common sense from a legislator. (
Side: No
1 point

No. I don't think it is possible to bail out the American auto industry. Giving them money is the equivalent of flushing it down the toilet. The Big 3 have a deeply flawed business strategy. Their vehicles are substandard, overpriced, and boring. They spend far too much money on ineffective marketing; case in point: Transformers. The fact that GM is again paying millions of dollars to get their vehicles in the sequel even while they are floundering in a pool of financial woe really shows how poorly this company is managed. A quick glance at the Japanese, Germans, and Italians showcase the real way to run a car company: innovation and quality.

Side: No

It is an absolute disgrace that America has to bailout companies that have clearly failed. Capitalism is a profit-loss system and not a profit system.

Side: No