Comments on: Just Say No

By: Norbert

Norbert — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:19:38 +0000

btw. they helped Volvo (Ford)…
http://www.motorauthority.com/sweden-promises-445-million-in-loan-guarantees-to-volvo.html

By: Charlotta

Charlotta — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 07:41:37 +0000

Even if Saab formally is owned by GM, most people very much consider this to be a Swedish firm, and my guess is that Saab to most Swedes is like Ford for an American. And,it is still the same job loss. But as Christer pointed out above, we went through the same issues by the end of the 1970s with the shipbuilding industry. It got huge governmental financial support, money completely lost. So, I assume the decision not to give financial support to Saab/GM is a result from this earlier failure.

By: Wendy

Wendy — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 18:10:21 +0000

The US government has been subsidizing the automotive industry, especially the big 3, for decades. The highway system itself is a massive subsidy to the auto industry. Keeping fuel efficiency standards low was a subsidy as it allowed them not to change. Limiting foreign-built cars from being sold is a form of subsidy.

The US auto industry has been cottled and protected for decades, making it so hard to say “no” now.

In Sweden, without this long history of subsidizing GM, it’s easier to say no.

By: carlos9900

carlos9900 — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:00:23 +0000

I think is logic that if Saab is now owned by GM, Swedish people don’t have to care about it so much.

By: Robert

Robert — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:40:49 +0000

Would it be possible to argue that this is rather a sign that the Swedish government isn’t in such cahoots with big business as the US and the UK governments, rather than an illustration of how the US and UK don’t really have a coherent take on the Neo-Liberalism that they otherwise espouse? Or both?

By: Jana

Jana — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 02:49:53 +0000

I only wish that Canada had been as courageous. Just because the US is attempting to use bailouts does not mean that the same is the correct course of action for us.

Hopefully in the wake of Sweden’s decision, other countries will be able to follow suit.

By: Charlotta

Charlotta — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 13:51:14 +0000

I agree with you, Christer. The Swedish government has been there before, tried it — and learnt the lesson. Industry bail outs simply don’t work in the long run.

By: christer mellstrand

christer mellstrand — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 12:47:24 +0000

I think the lesson was learned 1970-80 when billions was put into saving the Swedish shipbuilding industry without any success.

As Maud Olofsson, Enterprise Minister said: “why should the Swedish government be a better car manufacturer then the world’s biggest car company.”

By: Susanne Maria Schmidt

Susanne Maria Schmidt — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 10:05:36 +0000

It is remarkable that the “Lummerland” Sweden is strict on economic theory and political economy. Not intervening is a sign of very clear views on the function of business and the economy in general. The argument of job losses in the short term is unconvincing as failing organizations need to be eliminated to give way for new concepts. The tax payers money is better invested into the people loosing their jobs than into bad management.

Nonetheless, I would contribute financially to any fund investing into Saab …

By: Dave Reid

Dave Reid — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 01:06:01 +0000

Also they maybe able to take the hit of Saab failing more easily than the U.S. can with the big 3 all going at once.