Worse Than I Thought 1
They just won´t be satisfied until every moment is a WTF?! moment in Clown World.
Mary Barra continues to raise the bar in terms of lowering the bar.
It's no secret that we have no respect for G.M. or its Chair/CEO here, but the corporation is far worse than even we imagined.
One website used to do a "death watch," on General Morons Motors, before it went into receivership, and it looks like time for another. G.M. indeed went under, and according to various opinions, some expressed in a persuasive YouTube video, it must do so, again, due to its naughty entanglement with China, which is going to suck it dry, one way or the other.
(Bungling Stellantis needs to be put on watch as well. Its financial health evaluation is rated as: "High Distress/Pivot Zone." In its case, due to government supports, the threat presents as a structural dismantling, wherein the automaker may spin off or shut down bleeding subsidiary/"lesser" brands. And don't ignore how Mazda, Honda, and Ford are tottering after losses.)
This video gives a window into some of the games these auto companies have been and are playing. Really devastating.
What's the cause of all this corporate mismanagement?
The boobs in the management suite are rarely fired because executives sit on each other's boards, in a closed loop of protection and mutual enrichment called the interlocking directorate.
The G.M. Board of Directors exemplifies this phenomenon of "Boardroom Stagnation."
Barra doesn't just run G.M. but is an influential player on other high-profile boards, providing a protective armor: A director at The Walt Disney Company since 2017, Barra also serves on the board of the elite lobbying group, Business Roundtable, composed of the CEOs of America’s largest companies, and on the Duke and Stanford University Board of Trustees. And the Detroit Economic Club Board of Trustees.
However does Barra manage to fit in time for a "24/7/365" job at G.M., while helping run a global media conglomerate? Some think the CEO should be focused on fixing G.M.'s engine failures or something.
It turns out the board, supposed to hold Barra accountable, was largely hand-picked by Barra. That entity is praised for creating the first majority-female board at an automaker, without any acknowledgment that there's not supposed to be favoritism of women, but of the best people for the job, whatever their sex. Critics argue this board is less likely to challenge Barra's strategy.
When a CEO treats a 100-year-old industrial titan like a side-hustle while cashing out enough to live a thousand lifetimes, the "proper attention" [to the company that's paying Barra's inflated salary] isn't just missing — it’s impossible.
They have no incentive to crack down on high CEO pay because they all benefit from the same high-pay standards at their own companies. While technically "independent," not working for G.M., they are almost all current or former CEOs of other firms like Hewlett Packard (Pat Russo), Lockheed Martin (Linda Gooden), and Visa (Al Kelly).
It is the ultimate "corporate capture" scenario.
Barra was aggressively unloading shares at the same time the board authorized $22 billion in stock buybacks to prop up the share price artificially. Since 2021, Barra has sold an estimated 4.2 million shares for $239.5 million, obviously raising issues as to commitment to the firm that the CEO supposedly serves.
As vested stock was cashed out hand over fist, Barra's company just recorded nearly $8 billion in losses from a failed EV strategy.
...in this "idiocracy" cycle, the goal isn't to build a better car — it's to extract as much value as possible before the "taxpayer safety net" is inevitably deployed.
The "Boardroom Echo Chamber"
The curated board was selected based on specific optics (like the majority-female milestone) rather than specialized manufacturing or automotive crisis experience, building a firewall against dissent. This board sat by idly while G.M. wasted billions on a largely scrapped EV strategy. In any other industry, that would lead to an immediate firing. Instead, they voted to exclude those losses from Barra's bonus calculations, casting the blame on "tariffs."
Barra's side hustles eat up considerable time. Disney and The Business Roundtable aren't just honorary titles, but involve massive committee work and travel. While G.M. was suffering from catastrophic software glitches that bricked new vehicles, Barra was attending board meetings for a media giant and lobbying in D.C.
Is the most monstrous part gambling the company’s survival to protect the stock price for executive exits? Since 2024, G.M. has spent more on financial engineering via stock buybacks than it has on R&D.
Statista indicates that, since 2024, General Motors has spent an estimated $17.7 billion on Research and Development (R&D). Contrast with that $22 billion in stock buybacks over the same term.
By the time they put the taxpayer back on the hook, Barra and the nepo board will have already "cashed out" their vested interests, leaving a trail of unemployed and a few still-working stragglers to deal with the bankruptcy or the "quiet death."
So, not a failure of technology but a failure of character at the very top.
Probing a little deeper, we find:
Corporate Safety-Net Mechanisms
Stealth Bailout
The most effective, quiet way to save a waning brand is for the federal and state governments to bolster it with a massive infusion of cash, the mechanism of a "stealth bailout." The massive purchasing power of the government is deployed to purchase vehicles for government fleets, so the state can inject billions into a failing company without ever having to pass a "Bailout Bill" in Congress that would trigger a public outcry.
This "indirect" rescue strategy is apparently becoming the standard playbook, with deals like "Indefinite Quantity Contracts." As of April 2026, companies like G.M. and Ford continue to dominate institutional fleet contracts, with long-term agreements. By mandating that agencies buy hundreds of thousands of new vehicles (often under the guise of an "EV transition" or "modernization"), the government provides a guaranteed revenue floor that doesn't exist in the open retail market.
Stealth Subsidies
Stellantis, struggling with massive tariff costs for its global parts, gets a government-sponsored "hidden" relief via MSRP-Based Offsets. A new 2025 proclamation allows U.S. manufacturers to receive an offset equal to 3.75% of the total MSRP of all vehicles they assemble domestically.
This effectively gives a company like G.M. or Stellantis a multi-billion dollar "tax break" simply for staying in business, regardless of how many boobs are in the C-suite or how many bad decisions they've made.
Exploiting "National Security"
Execs and their buddies in Washington often pivot to the "National Security" argument to justify stealth intervention.
By labeling an automaker as "critical infrastructure," the government can offer massive low-interest loans and grants (like the $39.9 billion currently being distributed for EV supply chains) that function as a perpetual lifeline.
By giving equally to both parties' leadership, no matter who is in the White House, the "thoughtful approach" to the industry always involves a taxpayer-funded safety net.
"Zombie" Rebirth
Even if the brand is dying, these corporate-government "buddies" can orchestrate a controlled merger where the government helps a "marketing arm" (like the SAIC-GM relationship, a 50-50 partnership between General Motors and SAIC Motor) stay alive by guaranteeing its contracts through 2027 and beyond. The public is told the company was "saved," but in reality, it has just been nationalized by proxy.
The taxpayer is the "lender of last resort" for people who have already cashed out their chips. Whether it's a million-car fleet buy or a stealth tariff offset, the goal is to prevent the "leaders" of these corporations from ever having to face the consequences of their own incompetence.
Next, a look at one of the worst, most laughable, follies Barra hath wrought.
Comments