Darwinism, as used since the late 19th century, refers to the concept of natural selection in evolution. Based upon the studies of Charles Darwin, Darwinism promotes that the "fittest" of its species will survive and live to create the next generation. Applied to business, this theory makes a lot of sense. The fittest or most profitable businesses should survive, and others will follow their business models to eventual success themselves. But what happens when the system fails?

Survival Of The Poorest
Today, the bailout loans for the Big Three automakers, General Motors (NYSE:GM), Ford (NYSE:F) and privately held Chrysler, were announced by the Bush administration, throwing what many believe is "good money after bad". These companies have not been profitable for years, and in particular, General Motors hasn't made a net profit in the past three years, and lost almost $39 billion ($39 per share) over the past 12 months. How can a company that hasn't been profitable since 2004 blame its situation on the goings on of the past 24 months? The answer to this question is that it can't - General Motors is not a fit company. (To learn the difference between Chrysler's structure and the other two, be sure to read our frequently asked question What's the difference between publicly and privately-held companies?)

The loans were made to the troubled automakers with danger to the nation's economy through closures as the reason for the bailout. In exchange for the rescue, tough concessions are required from the companies and their workers (represented by the United Autoworkers Union or UAW). In addition, the government will have the right to become a shareholder - much like it did with many of the major banks that it also bailed out.

Under the conditions of the loan, GM and Chrysler would have to provide warrants to the government giving it the option to buy in at a specific price. Ford, whose CEO Alan Mulally said would not need the short-term financial assistance, will not be offering up any ownership as of now. Ford's hope is that the aid to the other companies should be enough to stabilize the industry and that Ford will not need to take advantage of the loans being offered. (Discover the advantages of warrants to see why the government might want to use them in our article: What Are Warrants?)

Automakers Are Different
In any other industry, in any other time, companies that are not profitable either close-up shop or are strategically acquired by other parties. So, why did the government feel it had to step in this time?

Given the current financial environment I agree that a failure of these businesses would be detrimental to the economy, but I wonder if artificially propping up these companies is going to change that. Investors (both at home and abroad) are aware of the aid, and this will not necessarily make them any more comfortable in pouring money back into the economy. Yes, the workers will continue to be employed for now, but the concessions required of these companies will result in pay cuts and layoffs - things that would have occurred in a pre-packaged and orderly bankruptcy process. As it stands, I wouldn't be surprised if General Motors still went belly up. Indeed, Fitch Ratings has downgraded GM and Chrysler's debt rating to C from CCC believing that a default is imminent.

Thanks to this act of government, these companies won't be able to just default on the billions in debt they already have, they will default on the tax payer's money now too. I wonder who gets paid first if and when a bankruptcy actually does occur. (Be sure to read our related article What Is A Corporate Credit Rating? to learn more about this concept and An Overview Of Corporate Bankruptcy to learn about chapter 11 and chapter 7 filings.)

Bottom Line
I say let them fail. Darwinian pain has been necessary for many other species and industries to reform - take for example, the airline industry or the recent banking industry pains. If the banks can merge, file bankruptcy and arise better, then why can't the automakers? Darwinism must be dead.

Related Articles
  1. Stock Analysis

    3 Resilient Oil Stocks for a Down Market

    Stuck on oil? Take a look at these six stocks—three that present risk vs. three that offer some resiliency.
  2. Economics

    Keep an Eye on These Emerging Economies

    Emerging markets have been hammered lately, but these three countries (and their large and young populations) are worth monitoring.
  3. Stock Analysis

    Is Pepsi (PEP) Still a Safe Bet?

    PepsiCo has long been known as one of the most resilient stocks throughout the broader market. Is this still the case today?
  4. Investing

    The ABCs of Bond ETF Distributions

    How do bond exchange traded fund (ETF) distributions work? It’s a question I get a lot. First, let’s explain what we mean by distributions.
  5. Stock Analysis

    3 Stocks that Are Top Bets for Retirement

    These three stocks are resilient, fundamentally sound and also pay generous dividends.
  6. Investing News

    Are Stocks Cheap Now? Nope. And Here's Why

    Are stocks cheap right now? Be wary of those who are telling you what you want to hear. Here's why.
  7. Investing News

    4 Value Stocks Worth Your Immediate Attention

    Here are four stocks that offer good value and will likely outperform the majority of stocks throughout the broader market over the next several years.
  8. Investing News

    These 3 High-Quality Stocks Are Dividend Royalty

    Here are three resilient, dividend-paying companies that may mitigate some worry in an uncertain investing environment.
  9. Stock Analysis

    An Auto Stock Alternative to Ford and GM

    If you're not sure where Ford and General Motors are going, you might want to look at this auto investment option instead.
  10. Mutual Funds & ETFs

    The 4 Best Buy-and-Hold ETFs

    Explore detailed analyses of the top buy-and-hold exchange traded funds, and learn about their characteristics, statistics and suitability.
  1. How do dividends affect retained earnings?

    When a company issues a cash dividend to its shareholders, the retained earnings listed on the balance sheet are reduced ... Read Full Answer >>
  2. What is the difference between called-up share capital and paid-up share capital?

    The difference between called-up share capital and paid-up share capital is investors have already paid in full for paid-up ... Read Full Answer >>
  3. Why would a corporation issue convertible bonds?

    A convertible bond represents a hybrid security that has bond and equity features; this type of bond allows the conversion ... Read Full Answer >>
  4. How does additional paid in capital affect retained earnings?

    Both additional paid-in capital and retained earnings are entries under the shareholders' equity section of a company's balance ... Read Full Answer >>
  5. What types of capital are not considered share capital?

    The money a business uses to fund operations or growth is called capital, and there are a number of capital sources available. ... Read Full Answer >>
  6. What is the difference between issued share capital and subscribed share capital?

    The difference between subscribed share capital and issued share capital is the former relates to the amount of stock for ... Read Full Answer >>

You May Also Like

Trading Center
You are using adblocking software

Want access to all of Investopedia? Add us to your “whitelist”
so you'll never miss a feature!