I am not an economist or an expert on big business. So my conclusions here are more based on deductive reasoning. I am an information junkie (a former journalist). And if you absorb enough of it and simply take the time to look around, a lot of what seems like overwhelming economic and business data can be boiled down. One thing I do know regarding the American car industry: buying inferior products in the name of patriotism is not the answer.

Eight years ago I was able to purchase a Volvo (owned by Ford Motor Company, by the way). My thinking was this. I would purchase the car, take copious care of it, and hopefully still be driving it twenty years hence. Not traveling in social circles where driving a Volvo means anything to anyone, that was my reasoning-pure and simple. I researched several cars and the Volvo fit my plan. Ford had wisely left engineering standard decisions in the hands of the Swedes. In short, the issue was quality and longevity.

For years GM (and others) had been cited by business experts for unhealthy profit-taking. Not enough new capital was being pumped back into the company to update technology and keep it competitive with Japanese carmakers. We all know where that ended up. As an aside, we just experienced an election where technology triumphed over old-style politics. If that doesn't reinforce the need to keep up with the times, nothing does. And GM didn't. The fact is, based on repair records, American cars simply do not hold up.

Most of us read profit reports and our eyes glaze over. Profit, capital reinvestment seems irrevocably tied to executive salaries, charges of contract gouging by the United Auto Worker. UAW workers earn $146,000 in salary and benefits; Japanese workers earn $96,000. A good portion of the difference relates to the high cost of American health care, so let's not be so quick to blame the workers.

For years I've wondered who buys the sea of cars you see on dealer lots. I'd heard that those not sold are at years end sent off to Latin America and other counties to be sold at undoubtedly reduced prices. This all begs the question: are American car manufacturers simply making too many cars? I was shocked recently when someone actually said to me (and I paraphrase) that it was my patriotic duty to purchase a new vehicle every five years! Oh really. Could it be that we've created a society reliant on purchasing for the sake of it, then criticizing the public for spending money they don't have? There's something very hypocritical in all this-a case against what amounts to a rather vicious consumer driven cycle. This all falls apart when people have no money-a situation rather prevalent right now, wouldn't you say? And the future doesn't look much more promising.

Suppose we cut car production back to reasonable size, making enough product for its legitimate market. Jobs will undoubtedly be lost. Much has been said about re-training workers in other industries. And what's wrong with that? Seems like a good solution. It will, however, take some degree of government coordination sure to be coupled with cries of socialism! As a friend recently asked, “What then is government for-to conduct wars?” The clear conclusion in this economic mess we're in is that you can not trust big business, like GM, to do the right thing. Those on top are still collecting huge salaries (in Japan, salaries of executives are capped); those familiar with working the system have already gotten their share.

Consumers no longer have the money to support this false bottom industry. So what now? What is GM to do? Is it worth it to prop up an industry which refuses to face the reality of its dilemma? Do we not do it and run the risk of thousands out of work? Decisions. Decisions.