Auto Bailout Legacy

[mspeasl]

[xbook]

Yeah because having a million jobs lost due to GM & Chrysler folding would have been so much better for the economy.

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by xbook

Yeah because having a million jobs lost due to GM & Chrysler folding would have been so much better for the economy.

And thanks to good ol' Uncle Sam they are doing so much better.

They would not have folded, they would have come out of chapter 11 leaner and ultimately more profitable and the US tax payer would not be on the hook - they would have been forced to scrap their union contracts, which is part of the reason they were in the mess to begin with. This move by the Obama administration was nothing more than political pandering to the unions. What is their stock price today?

[MiddleAgedAl]

Originally Posted by xbook

Yeah because having a million jobs lost due to GM & Chrysler folding would have been so much better for the economy.

That's ONLY assuming the billions of dollars used to bail these companies out would have simply vanished into the ether had it not been used on GM & Chrysler.

What if those funds were spent on bailing out other companies instead? Companies that dont pay highschool dropouts 30 bucks an hour (+outrageously generous benefits) to drop a bolt in a hole on some assembly line.

GM & Chrysler were, to a large degree, architects of their own demise in that they made many poor decisions over and over for many years, in terms of the cars they offered that nobody wanted, to the crazy compensation plans for their unskilled workers. Yet, they get bailed out.

There are other companies, who in 2008 had a business model that was just as sustainable (if not more so), and did not make as many bad choices, but those died due to market conditions outside their control. Their millions of jobs vanished, not because they weren't worth saving, but because they were not "too big to fail".

That's the problem with government deciding who gets to win and who gets to lose.

[OldArmy]

Bankruptcy is not a bad word. They'd have been about where they are now but without us flushing our money down the drain or having the government own them. The natural order of things should have been followed, we'd be better off.

[mspeasl]

GM Stock price High - January 6, 2011 = $38.98

This month - August 2nd = $19 Today = $22

I would hope the WH doesn't sell now or the Taxpayer will take it in the shorts

[rgrovr]

The whole "I saved the car industry" line by the President Obama will make the "Mission Accomplished" banner by Bush look like little league baseball if this happens:

General Motors is Headed to Bankruptcy - Again

GM still has lots of cash on hand - so this won't happen for a while, but they are and have not stopped losing market share so it is inevitable unless they turn that around soon. By the looks of their upcoming lineup vs. the competition - it doesn't look promising.

[jtvr4]

Originally Posted by xbook

Yeah because having a million jobs lost due to GM & Chrysler folding would have been so much better for the economy.

Please go on, I'd like to hear more.

[Bingobimmer]

A lot of money wasted, but this wasn't the first time that has happened. And it won't be the last....

[bga23]

Originally Posted by Bingobimmer

A lot of money wasted, but this wasn't the first time that has happened. And it won't be the last....

Unfort that is the truth. And doesn't seem wasting money is a party specific activity.

[Bingobimmer]

Originally Posted by bga23

And doesn't seem wasting money is a party specific activity.

The partisan gap has become so large that I am disgusted every time I turn on the tv. It is like WWI where everyone stays entrenched in their views, and the middle is a "no man's land".

[divisionbell77]

Originally Posted by cssnms

And thanks to good ol' Uncle Sam they are doing so much better.

They would not have folded, they would have come out of chapter 11 leaner and ultimately more profitable and the US tax payer would not be on the hook - they would have been forced to scrap their union contracts, which is part of the reason they were in the mess to begin with. This move by the Obama administration was nothing more than political pandering to the unions. What is their stock price today?

Its not GM or Chrysler folding, its all the suppliers folding that would then cause related companies, like Ford, to fold. Before you say otherwise, you might want to read the testimony to Congress where Ford flat out states letting GM and Chrysler fold will bring down the entire industry, we don't want or need your money, we need you to give it to them so we all don't go down.

It was the only bailout that actually needed to happen.

Oh, and it started under Bush, not Obama, from funds already set aside for TARP.

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by divisionbell77

Its not GM or Chrysler folding, its all the suppliers folding that would then cause related companies, like Ford, to fold. Before you say otherwise, you might want to read the testimony to Congress where Ford flat out states letting GM and Chrysler fold will bring down the entire industry, we don't want or need your money, we need you to give it to them so we all don't go down.

It was the only bailout that actually needed to happen.

Oh, and it started under Bush, not Obama, from funds already set aside for TARP.

Let me say this again,,, GM/Chrysler would not have gone out of business had Uncle Sam not stepped in to buy union votes. Further Ford would not have folded because some plastics manufacturer went out of business.

And I don't care who it "started" under, the Federal Govt needs to stay out of the private sector; GM, Lehman, etc...

[OldArmy]

Originally Posted by divisionbell77

Its not GM or Chrysler folding, its all the suppliers folding that would then cause related companies, like Ford, to fold. Before you say otherwise, you might want to read the testimony to Congress where Ford flat out states letting GM and Chrysler fold will bring down the entire industry, we don't want or need your money, we need you to give it to them so we all don't go down.

It was the only bailout that actually needed to happen.

Oh, and it started under Bush, not Obama, from funds already set aside for TARP.

Been to Detroit recently? A huge number of the suppliers, specialty houses, small unit manufacturers, others that supported the auto industry DID FAIL. There are vacant facilities all over the greater Detroit area, millions of square feet where the second and third tier suppliers used to operate. Stimulus didn't save them, they are gone, long gone. The argument that saving GM and Chrysler saved the small guys doesn't hold water because it didn't.

[divisionbell77]

Originally Posted by cssnms

Let me say this again,,, GM/Chrysler would not have gone out of business had Uncle Sam not stepped in to buy union votes. Further Ford would not have folded because some plastics manufacturer went out of business.

And I don't care who it "started" under, the Federal Govt needs to stay out of the private sector; GM, Lehman, etc...

Saying it again does not make it or you correct.

Some plastics manufacturer goes under? It parts suppliers. They supply everyone. Its not one either, its numerous.

GM and Chrysler go under, numerous parts manufacturers goes under as they no longer have the orders to continue business. Those same parts manufacturers also are a supplier to Ford. Now Ford can no longer build cars, they then go under.

You have zero idea at how tied together parts manufacturers are to all of the big three.

What you seem to not understand is the government never forced this, they begged for it. That's how bad it was. No bank was offering up loans to them. None. Do you think they wanted to beg the government instead of do it via loans from banks?

You seemingly have read Romney's 'Let Detroit Go Bankrupt' and think it is factual. The vast majority of it has been proven incorrect by independent fact checking.

[divisionbell77]

Originally Posted by OldArmy

Been to Detroit recently? A huge number of the suppliers, specialty houses, small unit manufacturers, others that supported the auto industry DID FAIL. There are vacant facilities all over the greater Detroit area, millions of square feet where the second and third tier suppliers used to operate. Stimulus didn't save them, they are gone, long gone. The argument that saving GM and Chrysler saved the small guys doesn't hold water because it didn't.

Except I never argued that saving GM and Chrysler saved the suppliers.

Part of the agreement was restructuring for both companies, just like any bankruptcy would. Orders cut means some suppliers end up going under. Just like GM and Chrysler had to cut it own workforce.

The bailout had nothing to do with saving everyone's job and continuing like normal. It was about getting them a loan(which no bank was offering either and they needed to have) and restructuring into profitable companies before the vast majority collapsed. I don't think people understand just what happens when a company like GM and Chrysler can not get a loan and their credit is 100% tapped.

It also went farther than just Detroit. Here in Ohio a good friend of mine's business went under. He manufactured and supplied ball bearings to parts manufacturers in the auto and boating industries.

[rgrovr]

GM is no where near out of the woods.. and they can't count on a Tsunami/Nuclear meltdown knocking out their competition every year in order to stay as the world's #1 auto maker.

Traditional bankruptcy (what should've happened) would have been far more beneficial to GM than the ham-fisted mess of restructuring that saved the Unions on the backs of the non-Union employees.

Lost in all this were the multitude of dealers that lost their business since they were shut out of the negotiation table.

The airline industry goes thru major bankruptcy cycles every couple of 10 years and none of them have been the deathblow to aviation like the canaries in the coalmine talking about GM and the car industry.

Or is anyone old enough here to remember the Chrysler debacle of 79 with Lee Iococca? The gov't stepped in there too and they still went thru Bankruptcy eventually..

[mspeasl]

Originally Posted by rgrovr

GM is no where near out of the woods...............

The airline industry goes thru major bankruptcy...................

Or is anyone old enough here to remember the Chrysler debacle of 79 with Lee Iococca? The gov't stepped in there too and they still went thru Bankruptcy eventually..

Or how about this one.

Drowning in debt, in 1971 Lockheed (then the largest US defense contractor) asked the US Government for a loan guarantee, to avoid insolvency. The measure was hotly debated in the US Senate. The chief antagonist was Senator William Proxmire (D-Wis), the nemesis of Lockheed and its chairman, Daniel J. Haughton. Following a fierce debate, Vice President Spiro T. Agnew cast a tie-breaking vote in favor of the measure. Lockheed finished paying off the $1.4 billion loan in 1977, along with about $112.22 million in loan guarantee fees.


So the FEDs have stepped in before. But never like they did this time with GM and Chrysler. So many Dealers lost everything when they were forced to close and go out of business. Think of all of those employed at those dealerships that no longer could feed their families or make their house payments. Etc.

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by divisionbell77

Saying it again does not make it or you correct.

Some plastics manufacturer goes under? It parts suppliers. They supply everyone. Its not one either, its numerous.

GM and Chrysler go under, numerous parts manufacturers goes under as they no longer have the orders to continue business. Those same parts manufacturers also are a supplier to Ford. Now Ford can no longer build cars, they then go under.

You have zero idea at how tied together parts manufacturers are to all of the big three.

What you seem to not understand is the government never forced this, they begged for it. That's how bad it was. No bank was offering up loans to them. None. Do you think they wanted to beg the government instead of do it via loans from banks?

You seemingly have read Romney's 'Let Detroit Go Bankrupt' and think it is factual. The vast majority of it has been proven incorrect by independent fact checking.

Stop with the regurgitated liberal nonsense already.

The federal govt has no place in private business. It is not up the federal government to pick and choose which companies it deems worthy of saving under the roose that it's for the greater good unless Uncle Sam steps in. What you and your liberal minded friends fail to understand is that bankruptcy is not the proverbial nail in the coffin for a company or their suppliers. The bail-out did nothing but salvage the union's grip on a company that is barely afloat even today thanks to the parasitic unions. It's like de-ja-vu all over again...

GM would continue to make/sell cars while in bankruptcy either with existing suppliers or new suppliers that would rise from the dust. You’re either blind or naive, or maybe it's a little of both if you think this was about "bailing" out GM to prevent them from going out of business. Get real man...

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by divisionbell77

The bailout had nothing to do with saving everyone's job and continuing like normal. It was about getting them a loan(which no bank was offering either and they needed to have) and restructuring into profitable companies before the vast majority collapsed. I don't think people understand just what happens when a company like GM and Chrysler can not get a loan and their credit is 100% tapped.

THEY COULDN'T GET A LOAN BECAUSE THEY WERE LOSING MONEY! DUH. WHAT DON'T YOU GET ABOUT THAT? NO BANK IS/WAS GOING TO LOAN A COMPANY MONEY ESP ONE OF THIS SIZE, THAT HAS NO SOLUTION FOR WHAT WAS CAUSING IT TO SINK IN THE FIRST PLACE.

YOU CONTINUE TO HARP ON THE EFFECT RATHER THAN THE CAUSE. LOANING THEM MONEY DID NOTHING TO SOLVE THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM, JUST LIKE IT DIDN'T 30 YRS AGO. UNION SALARIES AND PENSIONS (PRESENT AND FUTURE) ARE WHAT CRIPPLED THE COMPANY AND YOUR LIBTARD FRIENDS IN THE WHITEHOUSE JUST WANTED TO BUY SOME VOTES AT THE EXPENSE OF THE AMERICAN TAX PAYER.

[divisionbell77]

Originally Posted by cssnms

Stop with the regurgitated liberal nonsense already.

The federal govt has no place in private business. It is not up the federal government to pick and choose which companies it deems worthy of saving under the roose that it's for the greater good unless Uncle Sam steps in. What you and your liberal minded friends fail to understand is that bankruptcy is not the proverbial nail in the coffin for a company or their suppliers. The bail-out did nothing but salvage the union's grip on a company that is barely afloat even today thanks to the parasitic unions. It's like de-ja-vu all over again...

GM would continue to make/sell cars while in bankruptcy either with existing suppliers or new suppliers that would rise from the dust. You’re either blind or naive, or maybe it's a little of both if you think this was about "bailing" out GM to prevent them from going out of business. Get real man...

I stopped reading after liberal bullshit.

I'm a card carrying member of the Republican party. Unlike you, I don't suck on Rush's drivel. In fact, I realize what a worthless piece of shit he is and how he is destroying what the Republican party once stood for.

Open a history book: the US has bailed out countries before, and the opposition is always the party not in control.

Good for you for falling for this bullshit.

[divisionbell77]

Originally Posted by cssnms

THEY COULDN'T GET A LOAN BECAUSE THEY WERE LOSING MONEY! DUH. WHAT DON'T YOU GET ABOUT THAT? NO BANK IS/WAS GOING TO LOAN A COMPANY MONEY ESP ONE OF THIS SIZE, THAT HAS NO SOLUTION FOR WHAT WAS CAUSING IT TO SINK IN THE FIRST PLACE.

YOU CONTINUE TO HARP ON THE EFFECT RATHER THAN THE CAUSE. LOANING THEM MONEY DID NOTHING TO SOLVE THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM, JUST LIKE IT DIDN'T 30 YRS AGO. UNION SALARIES AND PENSIONS (PRESENT AND FUTURE) ARE WHAT CRIPPLED THE COMPANY AND YOUR LIBTARD FRIENDS IN THE WHITEHOUSE JUST WANTED TO BUY SOME VOTES AT THE EXPENSE OF THE AMERICAN TAX PAYER.

You have zero idea about anything. They couldn't get a loan because they were not making money? When has that stopped anyone from getting a loan? They had, 'no solution?' What do you think they were presenting to Congress?

They had a restructuring plan, but needed a loan to get them there. Not one bank offered up a loan, NOT ONE. They had to then BEG the government. Go to youtube, watch them in front of Congress.

Its about CREDIT, not about PROFITS. GM and Chrysler had zero credit left. Completely, 100% maxed out credit line.

Union salaries are what did this now?

You seriously have zero clue about any of this. I mean, you're a joke.