Market share and the " Big Three"

Before the 1970s, the United States basically dominated the automobile market. The big three include General Motors, Ford, and Daimler Chrysler. In 1962, half the cars sold in America were made by GM. Now its market share is roughly 25 percent. In 1999, the Big Three had a 71 percent market share. According to the Washington Post, their share is now 58 percent and falling. Twenty-three percent of those working for auto companies in North America now work for companies other than the Big Three. GM says its health care package, negotiated with the United Auto Workers, puts it at a $5 billion disadvantage against Toyota. Japan's government, not Japanese employers, provides all health care in Japan. This could lead much of corporate America to push the federal government to assume more health care costs. This would be done in the name of "leveling the playing field" to produce competitive"fairness." Every dollar GM spends on health care cannot be spent on developing cars, like hybrids. We know that any large market share and limited competition is not true competition. How would you define this "competitve fairness?" The Asian motor companies that are in the market are a part of these woes. They had easy entry into the market and are able to produce cars at lower total costs. GM and the other American companies are held down by the expensive packages the unions require. Should we save American automakers by raising taxes to fund universal health care, or is GM over its head? This problem sounds like a web of slippery slopes.