A discussion about Chrysler's bankruptcy plan

with John Stoll, Paul Ingrassia and Micheline Maynard
in Business
on Thursday, April 30, 2009 * * * * *

Sorry, this video isn’t available at the moment; please check back soon.

play

E-mail this video:

Distribute this video:

Share on:

Close
Description

A discussion about Chrysler's bankruptcy plan with author Paul Ingrassia, Micheline Maynard, Senior business correspondent for the "New York Times" and John Stoll of "The Wall Street Journal"

Video Share Options
Share
Buy Amazon DVD
Keywords:
economy
Cars
bailout
auto industry
Citi

In order to download Charlie Rose podcasts to iTunes for transfer to an iPod, you must have iTunes installed. If you do, please click the following link to download the podcast for this interview:

itpc://www.charlierose.com/view/itunes/10271

Otherwise, close this window to continue viewing.

Close
  • Comments 6
    Post new comment
    1. cello10  06/02/2009 03:22 PM Report

      Your guests are too conservative. They continue to preach "Free Market Fundamentalism" despite our current economic crises. GM's failure is largely a product of this failed ideology. GM had 30 years of warning about the quality, and fuel economy of their cars. They developed the electric car only under legislative duress. Then they killed it. Then they started to develop it again. Every time GM reacted to "Free Market" signals, it was already too late. Then they got whammed, first by peak oil, and then by our bubble economy. None of these guests seem to understand that the 21st century is about making the transition to sustainability. The free market does not get you there by itself. Intelligent public policy formation and planning is a crucial element. Your guests are kneejerk, 20th century conservative throwbacks, screaming socialism, and still stuck in 1980's, Milton Friedman thinking. They are oblivious to the challenges ahead in the 21st century.

    2. fccm  05/03/2009 01:07 PM Report

      PAUL INGRASSIA lost any credibility with his stunningly stupefying statement "The union is responsibility to a significant degree for Chrysler's woes and for really all the woes of Detroit."

      INGRASSIA needs to explain the worker’s role in past irrational corporate management and incompetent product development decisions. INGRASSIA needs to explain why Japanese CEO pay is a fraction of what U.S. automaker CEO's make. INGRASSIA needs to explain what Chrysler management did with the 72-mpg hybrid Dodge Intrepid ESX developed with federal government corporate welfare. INGRASSIA needs to explain why all Japanese, European, Canadian, Brazilian, Korean, and Chinese citizens have health coverage and not United States citizens. INGRASSIA even needs to disclose the car he owns. Maybe then INGRASSIA will recognize the line of cars behind him signaling for him to get out of the left lane while his turn signal has been continuously on for mile after mile.

    3. slovik  05/03/2009 08:52 AM Report

      I'm crying a river for the bond holders. How much of a return without the billions of public money we put in would they have gotten back. This was also tied up in those debt schemes we're paying for now too. Enough backroom deals with a guaranteed return for me.

      I don't want them to profit off banking tricks anymore. The same bankers set this up as with the sub prime mess. Good luck in court. All that public money has got to weaken their case, if there is any justice at all.

    4. patriceweber  05/02/2009 08:08 PM Report

      @yrogerg123: What happened to partnership in this country, between capital, workforce and management.

      What you are putting forth is a form of capital "dictatorship", no thanks.

    5. yrogerg123  05/02/2009 04:48 AM Report

      The "selfish and the unselfish among us?" Really? If anybody is owed money in this case, it is bond-holders. Workers and suppliers have much less of a claim to the company than the people who actually funded it.

    6. REMant  05/01/2009 10:50 PM Report

      The Chrysler outcome may be yet another nail in the banks' and financial sector's coffin. As I've said from the start of this "crisis" we are faced with a contest between the selfish and the unselfish among us. So I, myself, found the president's statement encouraging. The only way bondholders are going to be able to realize their money is if workers work. The distinction between shareholders and bondholders has to be erased in a general crisis, by which I do not mean that both have to bailed out, because they can't be, and that, even if you don't consider that the economic collapse the equivalent of a pyramid scheme's collapse. And, indeed, there ought be no difference between the two IMHO at any time, nor between them and labor. We cannot continue to imagine that it is possible to magically harness greed to do great things; things don't happen that way. Cos ought, in my opinion, to be owned by their employees and get investment from loans, and the loans come from someone's savings, period. Riding the stock market makes about as much real sense as riding the real estate market. What good either is it really going to do anyone to invest in precious metals, etc, or inflation-protected securities? Incentives have to aligned to reward productivity.