Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No private investor would have bought that company till the legacy costs disappeared and the union was broken. THEN they could have scooped up the assets AND employees for a song who would have been very grateful at that time to work for fewer wages, non union, making toyotas or Hondas or Hyundais.A private investor did not do that because they could SEE how insolvent they are.While that might be true, another investor may have come in and bought up cheap shares with the thought that they would increase in value at some future point, thus propping up the company just like the government did.
If the government were truly being socialist here, they would have simply nationalized the company, and called it the "bureau of manufacturing" or something like that, not allowing for future public sales of company shares. The government didn't "Take Over" GM, it essentially BOUGHT GM, with the intention of reselling it.
you're doing nothing but hypothesizing, guessing, maybes....as to what some proverbial investor might do....FACT: no investor did that, thus, the us government felt it had to step in and socialize the company in order to save it from failing. thats a fact, you can spin all you want about names of companies etc.....FACT: the us owns the means and production of a us car company
why you can't accept that, is beyond me
The Fed saw a power grab
The left wants it both ways. Can't a company be too big to fail, then saved but still fail cause we hate profits?
Have your cake and eat it too, why don'tcha?
The left wants it both ways. Can't a company be too big to fail, then saved but still fail cause we hate profits?
Have your cake and eat it too, why don'tcha?
Who hates profits?
I was saying that AIG making profits was a good thing.
Then my bad. I misread what you said.