What happens when the government doesn't bail out failed companies that make cars?

Believe it or not, it has actually been done!

A friend emailed me a link to this article about the ruins of the Packard plant, closed five decades ago. Titled "When the Cars Go Away," the piece details the vastness of the decay:

THIS week, as Washington has tried to decide whether to rescue the automobile industry, Americans have wondered what it looks like when a giant automobile company goes under. The answer can be found in Detroit.

In the summer of 1956, the once-mighty Packard Motor Car Company closed its doors. Its headquarters and chief production complex still stand here, though, and their slowly decaying remains serve as a symbol for the fall of American manufacturing in general and the degradation of the auto industry in particular. The Packard plant sits on East Grand Boulevard on Detroit's east side. It is immense: 3.5 million square feet of space in 47 connected buildings. The campus stretches for almost a mile north to south.

Since Packard's departure, there have been attempts to use the plant as an industrial mall, and at times dozens of small and medium-sized businesses operated within its walls. Today there is only one small firm remaining, a chemical processing concern. The City of Detroit and a private company have been fighting a long legal battle for ownership of the complex.

So the property is virtually abandoned, and much of it has been empty for years. Almost all the windows in the four- and five-story buildings -- thousands of them -- are broken. The bricks and masonry are crumbling, and two large enclosed bridges that soar over streets are falling apart. Part of one of the large passageways recently collapsed onto Bellevue Avenue, and still sits there, blocking the street.

Some floors have caved in because metal scrappers have cut out the I-beams. Vast rooms are filled with trash, from old shoes to unwanted pleasure boats.

Nature has reasserted itself: Trees grow on the roof and moss has spread inside. Chalky stalactites hang from ceilings, apparently the result of rain coursing through the walls.

Water from broken pipes collects into small lakes, freezes during the Michigan winters, then breaks up in spring and runs out of the plant onto neighboring streets. The plant is home to wild dogs, feral cats, homeless people. Arson is a regular event.

Said my friend,

Eric - I would love to visit this building. Maybe when you are back in MI I can fly out and we can make a photo tour of Detroit. We'll have to take your dogs with us for protection.

Whether I'll ever get around to it is doubtful, but I figured that others had probably been there, done that, and got the YouTube video!

They have.

This one is in three parts, and while Part 1 is the most watched, I kind of enjoyed watching Part 3 more, as the explorers have gotten into the rhythm of the gigantic place:

I guess that's what happens when the governments don't bail out failed businesses in failed urban areas.

But for those who like nostalgia, here's a vintage video of the plant in 1955, not so long before it closed -- showing happy workers on a happy assembly line:

Just think! Had the government bailed out Packard back then (and taken a supervisory role the way so many think they should in today's better world), we could have gotten on the waiting list to buy 1955 Packards (Russians used to buy their way onto waiting lists for Zils and East Germans for Trabants), and by now we might have them! Except they probably wouldn't be as good as they were when the company had to sell them for a profit.

And we could go right on underwriting the company's continued failure to make a profit, because it would no longer matter whether it made a profit, any more than it matters whether the government makes a profit. Nor would it matter how many cars it made, or what quality they were.

If we work this right, we could have a corporate utopia.

From each company according to its ability, to each company according to its need!

NAGGING QUESTION: Hasn't the country (and the world) gotten along without Packards?

Or does the question reflect callused advocacy of social Darwinism for corporations?