BB_TX wrote:
mrkoje wrote:
........... it was predicted that Ford would be gone as well without that bailout for GM and Chrysler. CLICKY..........
"......said Steven Rattner, who headed Obama’s auto task force. "
Would you suppose this was a bit biased opinion?
Also more Fords around this area, although not so much so as you saw.
Just because it's coming from Rattner doesn't mean that it has to be biased. Rattner didn't just wake up one morning and come to the conclusion that Ford would be bankrupt if GM and Chrysler didn't get the bailouts. There was a lot of economic research that obviously led to this prediction.
Take this for example:
"Without financing during bankruptcy, GM and Chrysler would have had to go out of business, taking down many suppliers. That would have likely caused bankruptcies at the healthier automakers such Ford Motor (F, Fortune 500),
who would not have been able to get the parts they needed to build cars. That is why Ford went to Capitol Hill in late 2008 pushing for the rescue of its rivals."
another clicky Again, I don't believe that Ford not taking the bailouts has anything to do with why you might see more Fords in one area over another. For example, in Bozeman, MT you drive a Subaru. It's to the point of being absolutely ridiculous. The last time I was down there I think I counted like 20 of them in a row on the 2 mile drive from the hotel to the museum. Why not as many Honda Accords or Toyotas per-capita? I think it might be more of a culture thing.