U.S. gov lost 11.2 billion on GM bailout.

[Mr Nice]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Just put a 3rd water crossover gasket in our 07 Impala. GM can go to [censored]. I'll never even think twice about buying one again. The market tried putting the company out to pasture once, and I don't care of a foreign company would have bought them in a real non government sponsored bankruptcy. Maybe then they would have learned their lesson.


Yep.

 

[SteveSRT8]

I can find you a person to say a particular brand is total junk no matter what brand you choose.

Imagining that only GM made junk cars is total "fanboy-think" at its worst, completely illogical and based on emotion only...

 

[javacontour]

Folks say that like it's a bad thing. If you're addicted to crack, the first step is stop using crack.

If your problem is your economy is addicted to debt, then you need to stop borrowing.

Instead, with the government stepping in and loaning money, the can is just kicked down the road. No consequences for bad choices. Let's pass those off to our children and grand children in a pile of ever increasing debts.

Should have had the pain in 2007/2008 because the pain when it does collapse will be far worse.

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: kschachn
When everybody is unwilling to do something, that generally means there is a reason why.



The market totally collapsed and no one was loaning any money 2008/2009.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
Let's pass those off to our children and grand children in a pile of ever increasing debts.


The next collapse will likely be MUCH worse...

 

[Tempest]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27

This was the point that I was trying to make in my first post in this thread.
The money didn't dissapear down a rathole and there are significant dividends to both the treasury as well as to the greater economy in terms of income taxes collected, sustained output, jobs preserved, unemployment claims not paid, suppliers kept alive and pensions not reduced to almost nothing.
All of the wages earned by those workers who kept their jobs as well as the benefits preserved for those retired cycle back into the economy as either purchases made or taxes paid.

So then why weren't all companies bailed out? What is the correct criteria for tax payer money being funneled into failing private companies?

 

[rshaw125]

People forget that GM wanted to restructure through bankruptcy before the great recession. Because pressure was brought to keep this from happening they were in even worse shape when the inevitable bankruptcy occurred.

The UAW flexed their muscles to get a sweet deal it was as much about their survival as anything else. All the other non UAW manufacturers would have loved to take GM's place. Hyundai,Nissan,Honda, Volkwagen would have had new customers to sell to.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: fdcg27

This was the point that I was trying to make in my first post in this thread.
The money didn't dissapear down a rathole and there are significant dividends to both the treasury as well as to the greater economy in terms of income taxes collected, sustained output, jobs preserved, unemployment claims not paid, suppliers kept alive and pensions not reduced to almost nothing.
All of the wages earned by those workers who kept their jobs as well as the benefits preserved for those retired cycle back into the economy as either purchases made or taxes paid.

So then why weren't all companies bailed out? What is the correct criteria for tax payer money being funneled into failing private companies?


The next thing you usually hear at this stage is about the "power of multiplication"...

Simple fact is GM would have quickly reorganized, more than likely into smaller more nimble companies better suited to survival. Investors would have been all over the opportunity, but somebody had to deal with the UAW.

 

[kschachn]

And most importantly you forgot all the union dues being paid. That's the most important thing as it is remembered come election time.

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
This was the point that I was trying to make in my first post in this thread.
The money didn't dissapear down a rathole and there are significant dividends to both the treasury as well as to the greater economy in terms of income taxes collected, sustained output, jobs preserved, unemployment claims not paid, suppliers kept alive and pensions not reduced to almost nothing.
All of the wages earned by those workers who kept their jobs as well as the benefits preserved for those retired cycle back into the economy as either purchases made or taxes paid.

 

[artificialist]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: kschachn
When everybody is unwilling to do something, that generally means there is a reason why.



The market totally collapsed and no one was loaning any money 2008/2009.

The federal reserve was printing money back then (And have for ages) so that banks could lend more than what they had in reserves.

The banks looked at the GM situation, and decided that lending that money somewhere else was a much smarter investment.

Anyway, somehow the USA did well, even when Studebaker, Cord, Dusenberg, and several companies were gone.

Also, if we didn't have some US based car maker, and other countries simply hired US labor to build things, we would still do well. Austria, Finland, Switzerland, and Belgium seem to do well.

 

[whip]

All of this outrage about GM getting bailed out, but you never see the same outrage over the banks. I wonder why that is?

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: whip
All of this outrage about GM getting bailed out, but you never see the same outrage over the banks.


That's probably because this is an automotive-focused forum and the auto industry is what most of us follow closely.

I can tell you without question that, among some friends of mine who work in the financial industry, there is a great deal of dissatisfaction with the bank bailout situation.

 

[eljefino]

^ yeah that's just the thing. An auto is the most expensive MASS PRODUCED thing most of us buy. It's easy to feel betrayed when something breaks, and it's easy to then project hatred or intended failure on a company that's wronged someone somehow. (And doubly so when GM denies a warranty claim for some specious reason then gets taxpayer money handed to them anyway.)

Although we've all been ripped off by banks, it's felt like a one-on-one thing, and hard for a consumer to analyze the big picture and see 1000s others being treated the same way. It's much easier to see pictures of a failed intake gasket and correlate that to one's own life.

 

[artificialist]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: whip
All of this outrage about GM getting bailed out, but you never see the same outrage over the banks.


That's probably because this is an automotive-focused forum and the auto industry is what most of us follow closely.

I can tell you without question that, among some friends of mine who work in the financial industry, there is a great deal of dissatisfaction with the bank bailout situation.

Almost nobody approved the actions made by the government and banks.

That doesn't make the GM thing less acceptable. Many people hated the GM situation because GM sold them a bad car or sold one to a friend, and deserved to be punished for it. Instead, they were rewarded for building things the wrong way.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: whip
All of this outrage about GM getting bailed out, but you never see the same outrage over the banks. I wonder why that is?


YES!!^^^

(Maybe that is because they are considered HARD right wing leaning and supporting entities. with no 'leftist' seeming organizations (unions) benefitting from their bailouts???)

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: Silverado12
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Just put a 3rd water crossover gasket in our 07 Impala. GM can go to [censored]. I'll never even think twice about buying one again. The market tried putting the company out to pasture once, and I don't care of a foreign company would have bought them in a real non government sponsored bankruptcy. Maybe then they would have learned their lesson.


Not saying GM doesn't have their issues, but so do the imports (transmissions, rust issues, sludge, etc.) IMO every foreign mfg. should be run off before the first American mfg. is allowed to fail. It's not like the Japanese don't prop up their own industries.


THANK YOU!!!

Yes, MANY on here conveniently forget that some of the Nippon manufacturers could ALSO be disparagingly called the (verboten on here) moniker they are SO quick to call/blame GM.

They didn't go BANKRUPT and have to have their governments bail them out.


Some of those 'infallible' Nippon companies WERE close to bankruptcy, and if they were not, and NEVER will be (see The Giant), then WHY were they taking the coin AND PROTECTION from their own governments??!!

 

[javacontour]

Actually, you can find many, like me, that were against all the bailouts, not just car makers.

Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: whip
All of this outrage about GM getting bailed out, but you never see the same outrage over the banks. I wonder why that is?


YES!!^^^

(Maybe that is because they are considered HARD right wing leaning and supporting entities. with no 'leftist' seeming organizations (unions) benefitting from their bailouts???)

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
Actually, you can find many, like me, that were against all the bailouts, not just car makers.

Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: whip
All of this outrage about GM getting bailed out, but you never see the same outrage over the banks. I wonder why that is?


YES!!^^^

(Maybe that is because they are considered HARD right wing leaning and supporting entities. with no 'leftist' seeming organizations (unions) benefitting from their bailouts???)



True. The Govt should stay out of private business. Let it fail, no one is ever too big...

 

[edwardh1]

Originally Posted By: D189379
Why do they not include all of the corporate/employee income/auto tax revenues they've collected since in that calculation? Or the dividends GM stock paid. Or the unemployment insurance they didn't have to pay to the GM employees that would have been laid off?

I don't care about GM or the US government, but I hate articles that don't give you all the facts.

------
agree. its a bigger picture, the recession was a factor too. GM executive greed needs to be addressed somewhere. GM execs made big bucks in all the years 70s and 80s when they made junk.

 

[javacontour]

Those losses don't include the bondholders who were put at the end of the line, unlike what happens in a typical bankruptcy.

If it was so important to save GM, why did the UAW or any others need government money to do so. Why not use their own pension funds? Their Political Lobbying Funds, etc?

I have no problem with those who said GM should have been bailed out. My heartburn is that those people didn't put their own money at risk. They used other people's money to do what they said should be done.

Why didn't they have enough faith in their course of action to put their own money on the line?

 

[OneEyeJack]

Did out government think the machinery would disappear. Bankruptcy laws work. They should have let the system take care of the process. When the government tries to run things they make things worse. We can't afford this type of help. It's way too expensive. The private sector knows how to take care of business.