Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 95
  1.    #1  
    DETROIT (AP) - General Motors Co. will fully repay the $6.7 billion loan portion of its U.S. government aid earlier than its previously promised payback date of June, a person briefed on the plans said Monday.
    GM CEO Ed Whitacre will announce details of the repayment during a visit Wednesday to the company's Fairfax Assembly Plant in Kansas City, Kan., said the person, who did not want to be identified because the announcement has not been made.
    Clearly this can't be. Everyone knows that Obama wanted to maintain control of GM to advance his socialist agenda. And just recently republicans were complaining about the bailout of GM, ignoring the hundreds of thousands of GM employees and the probable millions of jobs that were preserved in companies that do business with GM. They are not out of the woods...but they are getting close.

    Could it be that he knew what he was doing? Could it be that what he did was successful? How much you want to bet that no republican would be caught dead saying that....even though it's true.
    Last edited by davidra; 04/20/2010 at 06:14 PM.
  2. #2  
    I thought this was also interesting to know:

    "The company has received a total of $52 billion in U.S. government aid, with the $6.7 billion considered a loan. The rest would be repaid when the company sells stock to the public, perhaps later this year

    [...]

    Once the loans are paid back, GM would still owe $45.3 billion to the government. That will be repaid with the stock offering, which GM Chief Financial Officer Chris Liddell said would take place "when the markets and the company are ready.""
    August 2009 - January 2011. Thank god I'm no longer a Pre user!

  3.    #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by octoberorange View Post
    I thought this was also interesting to know:
    "The company has received a total of $52 billion in U.S. government aid, with the $6.7 billion considered a loan. The rest would be repaid when the company sells stock to the public, perhaps later this year

    [...]

    Once the loans are paid back, GM would still owe $45.3 billion to the government. That will be repaid with the stock offering, which GM Chief Financial Officer Chris Liddell said would take place "when the markets and the company are ready.""
    Yes, that's why I said they are not out of the woods, and neither are the taxpayers....but it sure looks like they will be.
  4.    #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by RPFTW View Post
    Why don't we bail out every large business that makes ****ty decisions and investments?

    What would happen if we did that?

    To support the bailout of a business via taxpayer dollars is the epitome of free market logic fail.
    1. Because the country would lose millions of jobs related to the auto industry and we'd rather have people working. Whether the company has learned what it takes to survive now remains to be seen.....but wanna bet they are alive and well with no debt in two years?
    2. What would happen? Depends. Those are the tough decisions that you don't have to make. But I bet if you grew up in a family with generations working in the auto industry, you might have a different perspective.
    3. and finally....maybe the free market does fail sometimes. Just maybe it's not perfect.
  5. #5  
    Here's the problem....when Chrysler was bailed out in the late 70's, wouldn't you think other auto companies would have realized that the union pay and benefits were going to do the same to them? A smart company would have started to make the appropriate adjustments to such ridiculous pay scales and benefits, but no, in the back of their mind they had to be thinking that government would bail them out if need be....so.....business as usual. The interesting thing will be to see if in 10 years they have learned their lesson, or if unions are still trying to get more than they are worth and willing to risk needing another bail out. My guess? At some point down the road they will be asking for another bail out.....I hope I'm wrong.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    1. Because the country would lose millions of jobs related to the auto industry and we'd rather have people working. Whether the company has learned what it takes to survive now remains to be seen.....but wanna bet they are alive and well with no debt in two years?
    No

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    2. What would happen? Depends. Those are the tough decisions that you don't have to make. But I bet if you grew up in a family with generations working in the auto industry, you might have a different perspective.
    Of course someone would have a different perspective, but that doesn't make it right, does it?

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    3. and finally....maybe the free market does fail sometimes. Just maybe it's not perfect.
    Who said it was perfect? If anything, it relies on success and failure. If there is no negative consequence to failure, it would be a lousy system. Trying to avoid failure will lead you to success....but....not everyone can make it, and that....is called life.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  7. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by octoberorange View Post
    I thought this was also interesting to know:

    "The company has received a total of $52 billion in U.S. government aid, with the $6.7 billion considered a loan. The rest would be repaid when the company sells stock to the public, perhaps later this year

    [...]

    Once the loans are paid back, GM would still owe $45.3 billion to the government. That will be repaid with the stock offering, which GM Chief Financial Officer Chris Liddell said would take place "when the markets and the company are ready.""
    Clarity always trumps hyperbole. Thanks!
  8. #8  
    We'd probly be better off letting the U.S. businesses go under and buying foreign cars from hereon out...

    than...

    what we're getting now...

    the Federal Reserve and the Foreign Governments owning your land, your car, and even you!!!!
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    1. Because the country would lose millions of jobs related to the auto industry and we'd rather have people working. Whether the company has learned what it takes to survive now remains to be seen.....but wanna bet they are alive and well with no debt in two years?
    2. What would happen? Depends. Those are the tough decisions that you don't have to make. But I bet if you grew up in a family with generations working in the auto industry, you might have a different perspective.
    3. and finally....maybe the free market does fail sometimes. Just maybe it's not perfect.
    Can answer all three in this: If a company like GM fails then let it fail. There would be other companies to take over or move into GM's place. These other companies would hire displaced workers and place orders with suppliers. I bet they might even make vehicles for people.
    Everything then starts new, cleaner and with a more streamlined and tighter bottom line. In the end it would be a better company. Big companies get bought out all the time. What make GM different? It's an icon. Give me a break. GM sleeps with who ever has the biggest handout. Just look at Testla. A tiny company that makes electric cars. GM a giant in comparison and yet they can't make a go of the Chevy Volt. Why? Big oil and the Government. GM just wants to know what is in it for them in the end. = FAIL
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm View Post
    We'd probly be better off letting the U.S. businesses go under and buying foreign cars from hereon out...

    than...

    what we're getting now...

    the Federal Reserve and the Foreign Governments owning your land, your car, and even you!!!!
    I guess it's a good thing then for the government helping GM so the Penske deal did not happen. This way GM can sell next time to a foreign automaker.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  11. cashen's Avatar
    Posts
    759 Posts
    Global Posts
    773 Global Posts
    #11  
    At least our cars stop.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by cashen View Post
    At least our cars stop.
    LMAO. Well I have to give ya' that one.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  13. ZR1
    ZR1 is offline
    ZR1's Avatar
    Posts
    33 Posts
    Global Posts
    37 Global Posts
    #13  
    Finally Pre
    "Everything then starts new, cleaner and with a more streamlined and tighter bottom line. In the end it would be a better company."

    Better for who the workers? consumer? they'd probably pass the savings on to you right?
    Strong viable company with 10's of thousand less people able to afford their product.
  14. ZR1
    ZR1 is offline
    ZR1's Avatar
    Posts
    33 Posts
    Global Posts
    37 Global Posts
    #14  
    Just look at Testla. A tiny company that makes electric cars. GM a giant in comparison and yet they can't make a go of the Chevy Volt. Why? Big oil and the Government. GM just wants to know what is in it for them in the end. = FAIL

    How much does a Testla cost? is it a product that is meant for the masses?
    you don't believe to make an affordable electric car that would be consumer friendly such as charging time and distance on said charge is no small feat? and is just a conspiracy from big oil and the gov.?
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by ZR1 View Post
    Just look at Testla. A tiny company that makes electric cars. GM a giant in comparison and yet they can't make a go of the Chevy Volt. Why? Big oil and the Government. GM just wants to know what is in it for them in the end. = FAIL

    How much does a Testla cost? is it a product that is meant for the masses?
    you don't believe to make an affordable electric car that would be consumer friendly such as charging time and distance on said charge is no small feat? and is just a conspiracy from big oil and the gov.?
    YES! Unless GM can't do volume and spread the cost out over more cars. How the heck do you think GM, Ford and any other big automaker produces a car? Wake up.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by ZR1 View Post
    Finally Pre
    "Everything then starts new, cleaner and with a more streamlined and tighter bottom line. In the end it would be a better company."

    Better for who the workers? consumer? they'd probably pass the savings on to you right?
    Strong viable company with 10's of thousand less people able to afford their product.
    For everyone. Sure some may get lost in the moving around. But in the end it works out. Read up on AT&T. That is a great story. Look today and hundreds of new companies in that market have come about. Employees get good wages and the consumer also gets a better product at a better value. Where do you think Sprint got its big shot in the arm from.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  17. solarus's Avatar
    Posts
    554 Posts
    Global Posts
    575 Global Posts
    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    1. Because the country would lose millions of jobs related to the auto industry and we'd rather have people working. Whether the company has learned what it takes to survive now remains to be seen.....but wanna bet they are alive and well with no debt in two years?
    2. What would happen? Depends. Those are the tough decisions that you don't have to make. But I bet if you grew up in a family with generations working in the auto industry, you might have a different perspective.
    3. and finally....maybe the free market does fail sometimes. Just maybe it's not perfect.
    I can't believe I gave a thanks to you davidra While you forgot about the equity stake your points are on the ball. The bailouts sucked but it was the lesser of two evils.

    What a lot of people fail to remember is that the domestics have been fighting the competition with one hand behind their back for years - as a result of bad bad decisions in the 70's and 80's but also because of enormous legacy costs from a time when their retirees worked in a time of 100% domestic market share, so hence there a lot more retirees now than there will be in another 20 years. For example GM, prior to the UAW taking over the retirement fund recently, was the second largest healthcare provider in the US. Union wages are only slightly higher than the non-union wages at a Toyota plant in Texas but the benefits package is considerably higher. Add in the structured wage structure where "the guy sweeping the floor was getting paid the same as a guy on the line" (not a specific example just easier to explain what a structured wage structure means) and it gets more expensive still. Obviously though making really really bad product and strategic decisions in 70's and 80's didn't exactly endear GM to the buying public. Throw in horrendous marketing for what seems like forever as the cherry on the top, and its evident that the problems GM faced were a result of a lot of issues some of their own making, and some not.

    I also agree GM will be around in 2 years, a lot longer after wards so I actually think the government will get all its money back - eventually. Anyone who doesn't think GM will be around in 2 years clearly isn't paying attention to the car market, the products that GM has released in the last 3 years and has planned for the future, and/or has written GM off based on the mistakes of the 70's and 80's. The Volt for example will do little to the bottom line immediately but the technology can be deployed into virtually any auto platform, with little extra cost, and can use any power source to charge the batteries (gasoline, hydrogen, natural gas, even a Mr. Fusion ). Imagine a voltec truck that gets Volt mileage and has a flat torque curve!! The cost will come down simply due to volume and reduced R&D expenses.

    And before anyone mentions Ford, the reason Ford didn't need money from the government is that they leveraged every asset they had and borrowed billions several years before the melt down. Its pretty well understood in the industry that they didn't see the crash coming they just took the gamble given interest rates at the time and got a little lucky with the timing. GM on the other hand, a notoriously conservative financial planner, took what everyone thought at the time was the right thing to do - sell assets as they needed the cash. When the market crashed GM couldn't sell any more assets (no-one was buying) and couldn't borrow against assets either (no-one was lending). Throw in Ford's slightly better reputation (they recovered from their 70's mistakes quite well) and its no surprise that when combined with a better public perception since they didn't take any government/public money and their sales are recovering better than GM's.

    Sorry about the car rant - I follow the industry quite closely .
    Last edited by solarus; 04/20/2010 at 10:36 PM.
  18. #18  
    Solarus - So what you are saying is that Ford wanted to have a leaner company that went back to it's roots and made the best cars they could that the mass market wanted. GM on the other hand just got money as they needed it when the bottom line was bad while making unreliable cars that the mass market did not want but would still purchase.
    Ford got rewarded with a better reputation and GM got a handout since they did a bad job.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  19.    #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    Can answer all three in this: If a company like GM fails then let it fail. There would be other companies to take over or move into GM's place. These other companies would hire displaced workers and place orders with suppliers. I bet they might even make vehicles for people.
    Everything then starts new, cleaner and with a more streamlined and tighter bottom line. In the end it would be a better company. Big companies get bought out all the time. What make GM different? It's an icon. Give me a break. GM sleeps with who ever has the biggest handout. Just look at Testla. A tiny company that makes electric cars. GM a giant in comparison and yet they can't make a go of the Chevy Volt. Why? Big oil and the Government. GM just wants to know what is in it for them in the end. = FAIL
    I don't agree. What would replace GM is almost certainly an overseas sinkhole of US dollars. Those "other companies" will not be hiring GM workers unless they move to Asia. Unfortunately the advantages that would be realized by the automakers from a real health plan was snuffed out by concern about universal (non-employee based) coverage. When GM has to pay $2000-2500 off the top of each car it sells to cover health insurance for it's workers, and Japanese carmakers spend closer to $100, the playing field is not very level.
    As far as hyperbole, it appears that GM will be completely in the clear within a year or 18 months...four years ahead of schedule. Their recent cars have been very well received.
    Have they made some bad choices? Yep, just like every other US automaker. Did we do the right thing? I think so.

    Is it the business of government to bail out Big Business?
    In 1970 the Federal Reserve bailed out the Penn Central railroad by guaranteeing creditors payment at a 2008 cost of $3.2 billion. Penn Central argued their existence was crucial to national defense. The loan was never fully repaid.
    In 1971, Congress authorized a $1.4 billion bailout to Lockheed, an airline manufacturing company. The companies’ failure would have affected GNP and national defense it claimed. The loan was fully repaid with interest.
    In 1980, Congress authorized a Chrysler bailout of $4.0 billion. By 1984 the loan was paid back and earned a $660 million dollar profit from the bailout.
    In 1989, the Savings and Loan bailout cost taxpayers $179 billion. None of the money was ever recovered.
    In 2001, after 9/11 Congress bailed out the airline industry for more than $18 billion. The deal netted a government profit of over $150 million.
    In 2008 Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were bailed out for $400 billion. None of it will be repaid to taxpayers.
    In 2008 there were many other bailouts, included in the TARP program, and many have results still open to loss or recovery.
    So the government has been in the business of bailing out Big Business and Banking for decades, right or wrong. It has sometimes earned profit from the bailouts and sometimes, like the Savings and Loans bailouts, lost everything invested.
    One thing we do know … consumers have never liked the idea of government bailing out industry. But, in spite of that government has stepped forward when it believed the public interest to be at stake.
    And while presidents of both political parties have supported the bailouts the recent history is that Republican presidents have more often been in favor of such government actions.
    So when government bailed out General Motors and Chrysler, should it have instead allowed them to fail?
    Well, at the time of the collapse, the auto industry was quickly being sucked into the whirlpool of the banking failures, and selling cars without loans became virtually impossible. Industry sales collapsed as did the entire economy.
    The deepest recession since the Great Depression took down the entire industry. Ford, who survived without government money, only did so because it anticipated the catastrophic business climate and mortgaged itself to the hilt in advance.
    Auto sales fell from a high of more than 16 million annually to just over 10 million annually.
    But what would have happened had GM been allowed to fail? Some assumptions seem safe to consider. Given their debt ratio the only bankruptcy would have been liquidation, ending the direct jobs of more than 211,000 employees.
    But beyond GM employees, suppliers would have also failed, costing as many as a million jobs and placing the supply lines for remaining auto makers in jeopardy.
    Given an unemployment rate that would eventually reach 10 percent, these job losses could well have plunged the nation into depression, triggering other industries failures and job losses.
    So the government invested $61 billion in GM and $8 billion in short-term (5 year) loans. What has happened? GM promises to repay all of the five-year loans this year, four years ahead of schedule.
    And GM expects to be profitable this year, perhaps permitting the company to make an Initial Public stock offering (IPO). Should that happen investors currently think GM could be valued at more than $50 billion, enough to begin a serious payback of the public investment in the company.
    Public sentiment aside, the bailout was in the public interest and President Bush and President Obama both made the right decisions
    The Ironton Tribune | Looking at the reality of the GM bailout
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    I guess it's a good thing then for the government helping GM so the Penske deal did not happen. This way GM can sell next time to a foreign automaker.
    I don't think you understand the reality of the situation. Lemme copy this from another thread...

    EVERY home in America is in debt $130,000 or more from corporate bailouts alone... which should be repaid over the next 10-years... in actuality, requiring EVERY homeowner in America to come up with $13,000 a year for the next 10-years, which we likely won't be able to pay... so there will be EVEN MORE interest on top of this already massive debt.

    The authoritarians have done this stuff on purpose. It's no accident. Eventually, the banks will own all the property, and we'll just have no choice to be their slaves, even tho that's already the reality of the situation today... there's just more "Matrix" over our eyes today.

    Could you imagine what life would be like if our government leaders had opted to let the businesses fail, and, instead, gave $20,000 to every homeowner for the purpose of installing solar panels, $5,000 to start a garden, etcetera??? We'd only be in 1/5th as much debt as we are now, *and* every home would be self-sufficient.

    Drones make this all possible.
    GM is small potatoes. And since you really didn't have much to say about the LARGE PRINT line that you quoted of mine, entertain yourself with some more REAL details about how the government is capable of finding the right stick to dangle in front of your face so that you go straight to work, then straight home, then full 8 hours of sleep at night, then wake up, straight to the cubicle, straight home, 8 hours sleep, wake up... all over again until you die!!! How do they have so much control over you???

    Your birth certificate actually has a bond tracking number, and that is how the government generates money. Whether it asks the Federal Reserve, a private corporation, to print money out of thin air, or it asks the Chinese Government for $800 billion (promising BOTH of them interest, that is debt, which is you; the Matrix is more real than you ever dreamed)... the collateral is, most definitely, your birth certificate. As someone who is born into an obligation to be a U.S. Citizen, you don't even realize what you're getting into. It is in invalid contract, since you were obviously not of sound mind when your parents entered you into this contract.

    Not only do they have your birth certificates w/ bond tracking numbers as collateral, but THEY OWN YOUR PROPERTY, TOO!!! They have the deed to your land, while you only have the Certificate of Deed (think of a gift certificate)... which is why you MUST pay them, because they are essentially leasing the land out to you. You own the house, but they own the land.

    And it doesn't just stop with your land. THEY OWN YOUR CAR, TOO!! They have the Title; you have the Certificate of Title. When you buy a car from the dealer, the dealer has the "Manufacturer Statement of Origin", which looks just like... ding, ding... a Birth Certificate. They create the MSO when the car is "born". After you agree to pay a note on the car, the dealer gives the MSO to the government. This is why you have to pay yearly registration to drive their property... and you can only drive their property, if you ask them for permission, in the form of getting a driver's license.

    If you manufacturer your own vehicle, or you get the MSO when paying 100% cash for your vehicle, you can keep the MSO if the dealer really wants to make some money, which he does. You just have to ask for it. From that point, you keep the bill of sale and the MSO, and then you can submit your "Claim of Right" that you relinquish your drivers license, especially since you aren't a U.S. Citizen. You're a U.S. National.

    Whew.... I'll let you guys chew on some of all that for a minute. My fingers need a rest.
    Basically, a corporation, known as THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, is co-owner to yourself, your spouse, your parents, your children, your vehicles, your land, etcetera. Does that not bother you? Does it not bother you that this corporation is taking money from you and giving it to the rich, when we could have spent 1/5th of that money so that every home in America would be self-sufficient in terms of energy and food?!?

    It p!sses me the flip off.
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions