AIG Update: PROFITS, that's right, I said PROFITS

[Big Fitz]

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?

 

[Big Fitz]

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

A private investor did not do that because they could SEE how insolvent they are.
The Fed saw a power grab

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.

That's the free market in action.

Case in point, the Rock Island railroad. It went down into bankruptcy in the 70's. Nobody wanted to buy the company, because they doubled up on most of the tracks of someone else, and the legacy costs were there as well. So what they did was get sold off piecemeal. A line here and there, with x amount of equipment and facilities. Repaint and rehire a few of their employees to help staff the new territory. It was bad, because it got broken up in such a... heartless manner, but it had to be done. Nobody'd take it on whole.

 

[Vast LWC]

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.

 

[Big Fitz]

Then my bad. I misread what you said.

 

[driveby]

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.

Obama hates profits ........

 

[Vast LWC]

Then my bad. I misread what you said.

All good, I can see how that might have happened. Probably could have worded the OP better.