GM's potential sale of HUMMER to Tengzhong is probably good news for those interested in seeing the company return to independent and profitable status as quickly as possible (and also Rush Limbaugh). GM can shed the negative political association of the land monsters and get some money in return. There is actually a better option, says the New York Times' Ethicist.

The Ethicist frames the issue as figuring out which is more important: GM's emloyees and shareholders (i.e., the American public) or the environment. HUMMER vehicles are too heavy and use too much gas and, the Ethicist says, hazardous products should be regulated by the government. Now that the government basically owns HUMMER, there is "an opportunity to reconsider transportation policy, including from a moral perspective. Such an analysis urges not merely discontinuing the Hummer but also significantly reducing our reliance on the private car." Here's more:
Shutting down Hummer could even turn out to be cost-effective. The sale price, perhaps as much as $500 million, may well be dwarfed by the long-term costs - in environmental damage, in public health - to us taxpayers, G.M.'s majority owners, of keeping those three tons of steel on the road. [...] The restructuring of G.M. gives us a chance to avert the fate of being laid low by our own automobiles, the grand manifestation of America's industrial might. The first thing we do, let's kill all the Hummers.
So, what's the right thing to do here?

Should GM sell or scrap HUMMER?
Sell - we need the cash 1 (50.0%)
Scrap - we don't need no stinkin' HUMMERs 1 (50.0%)



[Source: The Ethicist]

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
  • From Our Partners

    You May Like
    Links by Zergnet
    Share This Photo X