Is selling Hummer the morally correct thing to do? [w/POLL]
General Motors' 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. The move should see enable GM to shed the negative political and social association of the star-crossed SUV brand 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 employees 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?
[Source: The Ethicist]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
Sea Urchin 3:03PM (6/09/2009)
Well these days you have to be all that and in between. You have to make money and be morally responsible. That's what all successful companies do.
Reply
Rick C. 3:17PM (6/09/2009)
Wow, you said something that others won't necessarily deride you for. But this poll and it's options suck. How about an 'all of the above' choice?
jada 3:18PM (6/09/2009)
I just thought we were becoming a post moral nation… why do we need to bring morality into anything to do with business or government? That kind of sounds like a right wing question…
Jei 3:20PM (6/09/2009)
I agree with you a little....
Somehow I feel that many (publicly) morally responsible companies that are successful may have/do hidden immoral things that the public just doesn't know about.
OK, public perception is most everything these days. And I'd say most of the most notable successful companies have spent good money to make Average Joe/Jill forget about many of their misdeeds.
Sanders 4:29PM (6/09/2009)
Then don't call it a moralist quality. Call it humanism, especially if
you want to move forward to a post moralistic society. Of course, those of the extreme right and religious persuasion will find offense to the term 'humanism', and the self-determination that comes with it.
polo 4:14PM (6/09/2009)
The Hummer was nothing but a deliberate attack on the public health and our environment. People who drive these things should be shunned and forced to pay additional taxes.
What we need now is a RESPONSIBILITY TAX of 5% on the income of anyone who wrecklessly buys one of these things. Think about how fewer SUVs would be on the road if owning one knocked you up a couple tax brackets. The money from this tax can go toward helping lower income families buy high efficiency cars.
wilbonnet 4:26PM (6/09/2009)
Unfortunately, this assumes that the car, even a very small portion of cars on the road, such as all the hummers in existence, can have a significant impact on the environment. They do not. Not when 15 of the largest oil tankers cause more damage than all cars combined. Or when the strip mining for the nickel required to build a toyota prius gives it a larger carbon footprint than a land rover. Most of being green is simply politiking and marketing, which is why this argument is silly.
jayd65 9:56AM (6/16/2009)
That is what we HOPE that all responsible companies do. But really unless we know for sure the moral dilema of a set of decisions, it is almost inevitable that we will make a decision out of ingnorance, and not fact. So the real issue, and question is; "is it really morally irresponsible to make vehicles like the Hummer". I don't think that is a simple question to answer here today, especially when so much is based on opinion, and not fact.
Derek 3:08PM (6/09/2009)
The fact that this is even a question to taxpayers pisses me off.
I don't care what they do with Hummer, as long as they become profitable AND pay back all the money they took from us, including that which was already given to them before bankruptcy.
Reply
Matt 3:11PM (6/09/2009)
Derek, you took the words right out of my mouth.
What is morally responsible is whatever brings GM Back in (the) Black.
If that means selling Hummer...then so be it.
If that means keeping Hummer...great.
And if you condemn Hummer as environmentally irresponsible, then you condemn ALL large SUVs...which is irrational.
The H2 and H3 have fuel mileage right around their more traditional counterparts.
Polly Prissy Pants 4:34PM (6/09/2009)
"What is morally responsible is whatever brings GM Back in (the) Black."
Then you don't really understand the question.
notYou 4:47PM (6/09/2009)
"So, what's the right thing to do here?"
Offer North Korea the Hummer brand if it would please, pretty please, nuke The New York Times and it's self-proclaimed Ethicist.
Sounds like a winner for all involved. Can't wait to see Kim Jong Lil' [sic, snicker] toolin' around in an H1, he'd love it!
Journey2008 3:08PM (6/09/2009)
the NYT and its socialist agenda are it again. So much for letting the public decide anything on its own, we have good ole government tell us what's best.
Reply
Jared 3:39PM (6/09/2009)
I am so tired of envirofascists trying to dictate how everyone else lives.
polo 3:44PM (6/09/2009)
If you don't like it here there's always China. They love pollution, free markets, and you can get waterboarded at your nearest police station. That place must be rethuglican heaven.
joe23521 3:57PM (6/09/2009)
@polo -
Yes, the Chinese gov't loves pollution so much that they're likely to BLOCK the Hummer/Tengzhong deal. Okay.
John 4:54PM (6/09/2009)
"Envirofacists". I love that name, because that is exactly what the NYT and Obama's government have become. The morally correct thing to do is to defy anyone who would try to ram their opinions down anyone's throat.
The envirofacists have got the global warming thing so wrong that they are overwhelming a very legitimate discussion about fuel efficiency.
I sure would like to see all of them give up their heated cars and homes and try to survive the next few decades of global cooling.
larry raines 3:10PM (6/09/2009)
every time I see a Hummer, no matter the model, I just laugh. This brand and everything it represents is so antiquated. Kill it already, before it kills us.
Reply
gjc 3:17PM (6/09/2009)
As an avid outdoors person, I'm all for the environment, but come on people. Suggesting that the government kill Hummer due to it's negative environment impact is suggesting a type of government that is in fact un-American.
Hummer a niche business and I'm confident with some good management it will find it's place in the market.
Gotta run, time to go load some environmentally friendly blob-mobiles onto a supertanker...
Cougs 3:27PM (6/09/2009)
There needs to be a line drawn between business and morals. Capitalism is the process by which businesses provide goods or services - thats it. If there is a market need, then it will adjust to meet those needs. It is not some big evil thing that needs to be tamed, an enemy of people. Capitalism is what allows us to speak on this forum, for this forum to even exist.
Morals, on the other hand, need to come from a societal shift in one direction or another - stop targeting the branch (Hummer) when you need to target the root (customers). If you want people to stop buying big SUVs, work at advocacy groups, or start protests for the environment, or better yet (and more effectively) work with your local government to educate the populace and then enact appropriate policies. Don't just say "Federal Government, I don't like this thing, and neither do some other people...and we think it is bad. So make it stop."