It was so long ago, in 1953 as a matter of fact, that most people do not remember when U.S. Secretary of Defense nominee “Engine Charlie” Wilson, who had headed General Motors, got unjust political criticism when he made a correct economic observation — but one that his political detractors purposely twisted to try to make him look bad.
What Wilson actually said was this: “… I thought what was good for the country was good for General Motors and vice versa.”
But Wilson’s political critics misquoted him, claiming erroneously that he had said, “What’s good for General Motors is good for the country” — suggesting he was putting the welfare of General Motors ahead of the country’s welfare.
Well, what was good for our country was good for GM — and vice versa.
When our country prospered, GM sold lots of Chevrolets, Pontiacs, Oldsmobiles, Buicks, Cadillacs and other GM products. When GM prospered, that meant lots of good jobs, with GM paying lots of taxes.
But for a number of reasons — labor union problems over past years, some big changes in the habits of car lovers who used to trade for a new-style car every couple of years, some big economic difficulties, and much foreign car competition — GM recently has not prospered nearly to the extent that it used to.
General Motors, which has sold lots of cars in China and elsewhere around the world, now finds Communist China’s biggest carmaker, SAIC Motor Corp., is negotiating to buy a stake — about 1 percent — in GM for about half a billion dollars.
Can you believe it? The Communist Chinese want to buy into American free enterprise General Motors!
Well, among other things, it suggests that the Chinese know good cars when they see them.