[Mr Twisty]

Originally Posted by syr74

I love this argument. If you don't think major firms make incredibly stupid decisions on a surprisingly regular basis I have some ocean-front property for sale in Wyoming. The fact that what was once the largest corporation in the world could actually go broke within the course of a few decades is proof enough of that. Or, do you think first class decision making led to that?

Which Corp. are you referring to?

.....back on track.....

The congressional debate will resurrect all the arguments for and against giving federal aid to any company. There is a strong case that such help rewards failure and penalizes success, puts a dull edge on competition, is unfair to an ailing company's competitors and their shareholders, and inexorably leads the Government deeper into private business. Why should a huge company be bailed out, say critics, while thousands of smaller firms suffer bankruptcy every year? Where should the Government draw the line? GM Chairman [...] has attacked federal help [...] as "a basic challenge to the philosophy of America." ...

Supporters of aid argue with passion that the U.S. cannot afford the failure of a company that is the nation's tenth largest manufacturer, its biggest builder of military [specified armament] and one of only three major domestic competitors in its supremely important automotive industry

... Would you say smart investing, or emotions have dictated your decision to avoid GM stock?.... or ARE you avoiding it?