How woould you respond to: I believe that it was worth the cost of investment for the government to intervene in the auto industry back in $2008.$ If GM and Chrysler were to go bankrupt while the economy was already struggling, there would have been terrible repercussions.

I think that the auto industry itself would have been better served had GM and Chrysler went out of businesses. At this point in time, they were known for producing poor$-$quality, inefficient vehicles that could not keep up with the needs of the consumers $($Knowledge at Wharton Staff, $2018).$ Although they were on course to begin righting the ship ahead of the recession, when the economy went down, their debt was too much to overcome $($Knowledge at Wharton Staff, $2018).$ I think that much of their downfall was do to their own inability to innovate and exhibit good business practices. When a company fails to adapt and no longer provides something that the market demands, they do deserve to go out of business. Despite this, the fallout of GM and Chrysler going out of business would have had detrimental effects on the public during an already straining time. Not only would all of the employees for these companies lose their jobs, but many other people who worked for industries that supplied them would suffered as well. Companies that supplied the metals, plastics, electronics, lubricants, rubber tires, and other materials would have been staring at massive layoffs due to GM and Chrysler crashing. By bailing out this massive auto companies, hundreds of thousands of people were able to keep their jobs and greater economic damage was prevented.

I don't think that I would appreciate the government taking measures such as this in my own firm, unless it were in a similar situation and it were done for the greater good.