GM has a basket-full of huge, long-term problems that need to be fixed by something other than a $30B government buy-out.  Applying $30B to a set of problems that has already devoured much more capital than that is futile.  If the situation were simple, some bright people at GM would have avoided the current bind.  If people who know about and invest in the auto industry believed that $30B could fix GM, the money would have appeared through normal investment channels.  Is this to be a case where (government) fools rush in...?

I think that some of the key ideas (and/or their implementations) embodied in GM's corporate culture have failed.  For example, one idea that needs to be either abandoned or greatly reworked, is that US labor unions can set arbitrary conditions of employment independent of market conditions around the world.  (In fact, this idea is one that will have to be addressed in a much wider realm than that of GM-- it plays a major role in determining the US's economic place in the world.)  Another bankrupt idea deeply embedded into the US auto industry is that "glitz" matters more than functionality.  A third example of automotive wheel-spinning is the idea that car models must undergo major redesign every 3 years.  I'm sure you could come up with others.  Adding money to GM's coffers will postpone the changes needed, rather than bring them.

In the public discussions of GM's problems, the ideas and approaches suggested to date appear inadequate to provide a viable change of course for GM.

Capitalism has mechanisms for dealing with companies that can't compete.  Let these mechanisms work.  Change is necessary, and a futile attempt by the government to try to preserve the status-quo in the US auto industry is just pouring money into a black hole.  Speaking as a taxpayer, I do not want to "own" a piece of GM under any of the scenarios that have been advanced to date.