• Apr 2nd 2009 at 12:59PM
  • 55
According to The Detroit Free Press, Rasmussen Reports called 1,000 people and asked them if they believed "the economy could recover without General Motors in business." The results were clear: 76% of respondents said "Yes, it can." The sentiment against any more taxpayer money being used to assist automakers was clear as well: 62% said neither GM nor Chrysler should receive any more loans.

Just as interestingly, the public appears to expect failure from one of the two companies: Fully 59% said that it was "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that GM or Chrysler will go out of business in the next few years.

Yet while the results of this survey are clear, it could be that the first question itself is slightly misleading: The economy could recover without a lot of companies, including AIG and Citibank. After all, you can't really kill an economy as long as there are people left to exchange goods and services, right? The real issue is whether people are prepared and willing to deal with the fallout from such companies going out of business.

[Source: Detroit Free Press]

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 6 Years Ago
      The economy is immortal. The question is whether it will be crawling, limping, walking, running, or racing in a Chevy Volt!
        • 6 Years Ago
        Or racing in a Chevy volt...
        Are all democrats only good for sales pitch or a feel good line?
        I can race in a BMW, Benz, Lexus, or a Zonda R.
      • 6 Years Ago
      But most people, including me, don't know what the loss of a company as big as GM will mean to the economy...
      • 6 Years Ago
      They arent going to go into full liquidation...if anything they will do a government assisted chapter 11 reorganizing. Union contracts will be broken and hopefully they will come out of it more streamlined.

      the bailouts are simply postponing the inevitable

      ...how do you change your password on here?
      • 6 Years Ago
      The domestic automakers really pissed off a lot of people with their lousy cars and worse owner relations.
      • 6 Years Ago
      The only reason I see as NOT wanting GM and Chrysler is the loss of jobs it will create. I feel no pity for GM, Chrysler and Ford companies and their pathetic and "arrogant " adminstrations. Their arrogance, severe mismanagement and the "head in their ass" thinking has led to their destruction period. Also in the American psyche you think "Domestic autos" and you automatically think bad quality and poor reliability. These companies made crap for decades and they have millions of examples to prove it, ask any Domestic car owner of the 70's, 80's and 90's. It's a shame because GM has a jewel with Cadillac, the CTS is fantastic, and Chevy's Malibu Hybrid is a great car too. Chrysler is a dead duck period, the Challenger was created at the wrong time and way too late and with a crappy cheap looking interior to add insult to inury. I predict Chrysler will not be around in less than 2 years. GM and Ford may have some salvation.
      • 6 Years Ago
      DIE GM
      • 6 Years Ago
      If you cant generate a profit, your business has no right to exist, period.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Good job boxer fanatic....exactly my thoughts
        • 6 Years Ago
        There are never guarantees.

        Privately sourced "corporate paper" debt can be a useful, almost essential tool, if it is kept WELL in check, and the ability to repay is consistently verified.

        If a company has no credit rating, and makes no money, they do fiscally fail, and if they fail, they either learn and fix, or go out of business.

        That is the way it is supposed to work. Not giving peter's money to paul via the IRS and political game-playing. Depending on the government's tack, that is either Socialism, Communism, or Mussolini-style Fascism.

        Most people never got the history lesson, but the Italians LOVED Mussolini's Fascism, with soft tyranny of government management of industry, commerce, and social policy, with the thin veil and disguise of private ownership over the reality of governmental control, where an elite wealthy class is burdened, but not eradicated.

        Germany was much the same way with a little less illusion, and more obvious state control. The USSR (socialist in the name) made absolutely no illusion of private ownership of anything at all, and everyone works and lives by the state, and no illusion of private wealth, which got it the name Communism.

        The Italians were largely happy with Mussolini, all until the tide of WWII turned, and they realized that they were inexorably tied to Germany, and would share the same fate of losing to the allies, and couldn't separate themselves from the third reich. Then they hung Mussolini out to dry, upside down. By italian communists, no less.

        By not letting companies, banks, automakers, or anyone else, fail according to the market, and then re-build in a free market, without government controls, we have abandoned the free market, and with government dismissing and appointing private enterprise (publicly traded companies' stocks and derivatives are still owned by private people and private entities. They are not public in the same meaning as public/federal domain.)

        We are moving at supersonic speeds toward government management of commerce and industry, with a thin veil of private interest over the real governmental control. As the private interest gets crowded out, they will be unhappy and try to strain against being pushed out. But then the government will only push it out more firmly, until we move from Fascism to Socialism and Communism. They are all leftist, authoritarian systems that demand tyranny from the leaders, to control populations that become more and more discontent and disenfranchised, and even oppressed.

        And they all break down, either slowly or quickly, either before too much damage is done, or later when most of the institutions of a society then have to be completely re-built.

        The question is, how do you (anyone and everyone, not specific) want to go? As a wage slave, or as an advocate of freedom?

        If saving GM means more government, and movement toward wage slavery, then let them go, fail, and re-generate, and keep the government out of it. GM, or any other company isn't worth the loss of freedom that so many have paid for in blood.

        If we lose the freedom, someone, maybe our children, will have to buy it back, with even more blood. Do you want that? Or do you want to stand up for freedom now, before blood is required?

        This is more than political, this is fundamental, and philosophical. What are you? A citizen to whom the government is accountable, or a slave to a government master?
      • 6 Years Ago
      1- Do you want to lend (give that is) more money to the Banks and AIG?

      Answer: 95.3% no in my surrounding

      2- Do you want Obama to keep the manufacturing in USA and help the auto industry?

      Answer: 76% no we already have a perfectly american auto industry in Alabama, Texas with Mercedes, Toyota, Honda and on and on

      This is why we have intelligent people elected. They know that asking main street is one thing, when you have to be elected. Fortunatly after, they make sound and proper decisions and don't listen to this non-educated crowd.

      This blog is getting to be as hollow as the late Autoweek, which became Motortrend blog.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Remember when Autoblog readers and contributors waxed apoplectic because some other readers suggested that giving GM billions of Dollars was a waste of money and that bankruptcy was GM's best option.

      Told you so.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Exactly, why are we "bailing out" these companies. Oh yes right they need to borrow money to keep their business going. The stock market tanked so the companies have no stock value, then of course bigger credit risk, oh and the banks won't lend money even though we gave them 700B with no strings. Why, because the government messed up the economy so bad that no one can afford to buy cars, the investment banks drove the price of gas to $4.00 per gallon to hide their foreclosure losses, and all those great jobs we created at Circuit City, Office Depot, LNT and other retailers are gone, and they make such crappy cars that their numbers declined by 40%. Oh yeah didn't that happen to Honda and Toyota, because they only make cars with good fuel economy, like the Land Cruiser and Sequoia, oh wait they both get milage in the same range as a HUMMER. Tell me is there a bigger percentage of gain on fuel economy between a Prius and a Corolla (or Cobalt) or a Land Cruiser and Tahoe Hybrid which I can still use to tow my camper. Wait we don't need camper's let kill that industry too. Besides if we make the unions go away and we compete with the level of benefits the Chinese get we won't need the camper because we won't have a vacation. Just because HUMMER and JEEP were originally military vehicles made by american car companies. I have a better idea let the Chinese or India or somebody else build them. They do a good job of stealing our intellectual property now, hey lets give them defense projects too.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Whether this is true or not. I for one don't want to go through the motions of finding out. Since I live in Michigan, and 200 miles east of Detroit, I know the loss of GM will still have a huge economic impact on me and I don't even work in the Auto Industry, but... many of my clients work for GM and its suppliers, so when they don't have money, I won't earn money. I believe this is the ripple effect that many people do not take into account when we lose a major industry.
        • 6 Years Ago
        When I think of Detroit I think East. Clearly I meant West.
      • 6 Years Ago
      In other news, 76% American no nothing about economy.
    • Load More Comments
    Share This Photo X